The 100 Thing Challenge by Dave Bruno

In order to further enjoy my wonderful new Nook, I was browsing through the e-books available from the library and came across this book. I'd remembered a co-worker a year or so ago having heard about it on the radio and it inspiring a great conversation between us, so I thought I'd read it.

The book is about a man who felt he was so overwhelmed by consumerism, that he wanted to limit his personal possessions to 100 things in order to help him overcome that. I think as a personal project, that's great and interesting, but the book itself is not that exciting. Dave didn't literally have 100 things. He had 100 "personal" things. So everything that was family use- like a fully furnished house and kitchen was fine. In my mind, that makes the challenge fairly uninteresting. Other than clothes, you could get by okay without all of the other stuff, which is largely what he did. But I suppose doing so does require you to step outside of normal consumerism, as he did, and it seems he got a lot out of doing so.

I really did enjoy Dave's insights in to how he had used possessions in order to experiment with different idealizations of himself. He used woodworking tools in order to harbor a fantasy of himself as a master artisan. He used fancy pens to see himself as an extraordinary businessman. He used camping gear and the like to imagine himself as a rugged outdoorsman. It's not that any of these are bad items or things to aspire to, it was that these objects became about something other than what they were and took him out of the reality of his life. It wasn't about making a shelf, or signing documents, or enjoying camping, it was about a pretend version of Dave. I can certainly relate to that feeling. I remember buying a bike with the fantasy of myself becoming an avid cyclist and then using it maybe three times over a year. Even as I never rode it, owning the bike let me pretend that bike riding was something that I did, or at least would do and was in a way a part of my self-image. But really, it was a lie and I think those lies are somewhat destructive because they take us away from reality and seeing ourselves as we really are. I'm not saying owning the bike was bad- and I'll probably get a bike again. It's that seeing objects as a symbol of ourselves is a negative. We are what we habitually do- regardless of the objects that we own. I loved this quote that he included. "To be humble simply means to be realistic about yourself."

While the book was overall a bit boring, I think this point about not letting objects affect how you see yourself really resonated with me and made the book worth reading. I am very much an advocate of simple living and I think it brings with it a great deal of peace. I think this insight of Dave's helps shed light on one of the ways in which it brings peace and helps you to embrace your life and more fully live.

The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho

One of my co-workers highly recommended this book as moving and inspiring. Since my incredible friend recently gave me a Nook, I checked out this book as my first library e-book. I am now a huge Nook fan!

The Alchemist is a parable about a boy named Santiago who follows his dream to go to Egypt. I could write a seething review of it- critiquing the nonsense religion in it, people having a destiny that the universe tries to help them achieve, and a general vibe that reminds me too much of The Secret. But I don't really want to. I rather enjoyed the book. If you don't take the metaphysical aspects of it seriously, it's a beautiful tale about how to enjoy life. It says to pursue goals, take risks, and enjoy the unexpected turns on your journey because the journey is the true treasure of life. And I think that's a message worth reading about.

A Human Being Died that Night by Pumla Gobodo- Madikizela

Under Apartheid, the white controlled South Afirican government allowed covert programs of horrific violence in order to control the black majority. After Apartheid ended, South Africa instituted the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in order to bring to light the atrocities that happened under Apartheid. Ms. Gobodo-Madikela was a clinical psychologist who served on this commission. She became interested in meeting with the commanding officer of government death squads, de Kock, after two widows of men he killed met with him and spoke of how deeply his remorse touched them.

This book talks about Ms. Gobodo-Madikela's meetings with de Kock, and their impact on her feelings on evil, remorse, and forgiveness. I enjoyed how fully she acknowledges that the circumstances of a person's life frame how they see the world and how easily they can push the person in to seeing evil as good. Yet, while fully understanding this, she never fails to hold them accountable and still call them evil. I think that's interesting. When a person feels remorse and I see their humanity, I want to call them good and their actions/ thought processes evil. But at that point, what does evil even mean? Almost everybody sees their own actions as justified. And those that do not see it that way and have no remorse are almost by definition insane.

While she holds de Kock as evil, she also argues strongly for his humanity. She states that so many around her wanted to label him evil and then see him as an "other". She states "demonizing as monsters those who commit evil lets them off too easily... [it would] excuse the criminal by dismissing him in the category of the hopelessly, radically other." She says we can't do that. Part of being human is being capable of great evil. To not see that and to instead separate it as something a normal person is not capable of is to fail to learn from the past's lessons about human nature. Only if we understand just how capable each and every one of is of committing evil can we truly question if we ourselves are committing evil.

Ms. Gobodo-Madikela also makes the argument for the necessity of forgiveness for all. She cites the healing power that forgiveness has on victims and evil doers alike. I found the book an interesting and honest exploration of these topics. She never fails to acknowledge her own capacity for wanting to justify evil as good in the name of a cause she supports and in so doing invites readers to see this within themselves.

I see this capacity in myself. I can think of several cruel things I've done and justified in the name of a "higher" cause. I've long thought the worst evils committed in this world are done by people who probably think they're doing something good. Whenever a situation becomes "us" versus "them" instead of two groups of deeply human people who might disagree, I think there is potential for type of dehumanization that can lead to evil.