Julio Biason
4 years ago
2 changed files with 81 additions and 0 deletions
@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
|
||||
+++ |
||||
title = "The 7 Secrets of Exceptional Leadership - Brian Tracy" |
||||
date = 2020-05-24 |
||||
|
||||
[taxonomies] |
||||
tags = ["books", "reviews", "leadership", "brian tracy"] |
||||
+++ |
||||
|
||||
[GoodReads Summary](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18523862-the-7-secrets-of-exceptional-leadership): |
||||
In The Seven Secrets of Exceptional Leadership Brian describes the most |
||||
important leadership qualities practiced by top leaders worldwide. By |
||||
committing yourself to these seven "secrets" of exceptional leadership, you |
||||
can achieve all your goals as a leader in every area of your life. |
||||
|
||||
<!-- more --> |
||||
|
||||
{{ stars(stars=0) }} |
||||
|
||||
Ok, I have to say that this book rubbed me in all the wrong ways. |
||||
|
||||
First, more pictures than content. I mean, if I want to have a book about |
||||
boats, I'd get a book about boats, not about leadership. |
||||
|
||||
Second, the rules are somewhat weird. "A leader must know themselves" I can |
||||
get behind, specially because one would have to know their own weaknesses to |
||||
lead people. "Know what they want"... why? A leader may lead people to make |
||||
things they (leader) don't even fully agree, but know it must be done. Just |
||||
knowing what you want (even couple with the other points) doesn't make you a |
||||
leader -- heck, it doesn't even _fit_ the description of a leader. |
||||
|
||||
This was a book that I picked up and dropped next day 'cause fuck confusing |
||||
"being a boss" with "being a leader" -- and those two are completelly |
||||
different aspects. |
@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
|
||||
+++ |
||||
title = "In Fury Born - David Weber" |
||||
date = 2020-06-20 |
||||
|
||||
[taxonomies] |
||||
tags = ["books", "review", "scifi", "fantasy"] |
||||
+++ |
||||
|
||||
[GoodReads Summary](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/130528.In_Fury_Born): |
||||
Imperial Intelligence couldn't find them, the Imperial Fleet couldn't catch |
||||
them, and local defenses couldn't stop them. It seemed the planet-wrecking |
||||
pirates were invincible. But they made a big mistake when they raided |
||||
ex-commando leader Alicia DeVries' quiet home work, tortured and murdered her |
||||
family, and then left her for dead. Alicia decided to turn "pirate" herself, |
||||
and stole a cutting-edge AI ship from the Empire to start her vendetta. Her |
||||
fellow veterans think she's gone crazy, the Imperial Fleet has shoot-on-sight |
||||
orders. And of course the pirates want her dead, too. But Alicia DeVries has |
||||
two allies nobody knows about, allies as implacable as she is: a self-aware |
||||
computer, and a creature from the mists of Old Earth's most ancient legends. |
||||
And this trio of furies won't rest until vengeance is served. |
||||
|
||||
<!-- more --> |
||||
|
||||
{{ stars(stars=1) }} |
||||
|
||||
- (--) The beginning of the book puts a lot of backstory, all in the wrong |
||||
places: You're in the middle of a conversation, the conversation stops, a |
||||
lot of stuff is thrown at your face and... the conversation just |
||||
continues. Where did you stop? What where they were discussing? |
||||
- (--) In between backstories, there is a bunch of characters. Characters and |
||||
more characters are thrown in the story, perform something small, |
||||
disappear for a while, and suddenly appear again and who the heck was |
||||
that? Did they mentioned them before? Worse, some names are so close you |
||||
don't even know if it is a new character or an old one. |
||||
- (-) The first battles are too long and provide nothing about the future. |
||||
- (--) I don't have a problem with mixing scifi with fantasy, |
||||
but you have to build an universe for that (sad to say, but something akin |
||||
to "[Bright](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5519340/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)"), but |
||||
when you suddenly add a Greek spirit... everything seems to fall apart. |
||||
- (+) Some points are really well constructed. For example, there is a |
||||
discussion between three characters and you don't need descriptions to |
||||
know who's talking; their tone and words make things clear. |
||||
- (=) The pacing only gets convincing the end, when everything is done. |
||||
|
||||
Honestly, it could be a good story, if the spirit was removed, the backstories |
||||
cleaned out, some stuff that doesn't affect anything in the long run (pointing |
||||
that they happened, with short summary would suffice) and make it shorter |
||||
would be a real improvement. |
Loading…
Reference in new issue