Scan barcode
maryhurrr's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
informative
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
4.5
books_by_blue's review against another edition
dark
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
slow-paced
4.0
lee_hillshire's review against another edition
In high school I took a criminology class and went through a pretty intense abnormal psychology phase centered around the "antisocial personality disorder" umbrella. I was that kid who would immediately correct someone if they miscorrectly said "psychopath" when "sociopath" was more accurate, and I read so many articles about both. And then I got disillusioned with it and lost interest just as quickly. No one ever talks about how to actually help people with said conditions, any single resource you could hope for on depression, PTSD, anxiety, the "romantic" mental illnesses, every one of those had gallons of ink spilled on how to identify, treat, self help, diagnose, address, support, etc. But not ASPDs. And it pissed me off, so I (ironically) went apathetic about learning more on the subject.
So when I saw this book was coming out, I snatched up the first copy I possibly could from the library. There was always the chance that it could have been not what I'd hoped, but I was more than willing to read it no matter what. And you know what? This book would have kept high school me invested. It's personal, it includes enough therapeutic insights to begin to be practical, and it's (hopefully!) the first step in a much larger movement to actually begin to deal reasonably with the issue, and not just stereotype everyone with it as villains and killers (and people in HR).
In a lot of ways, it reminds me of a lot of the work I've read recently on autism. And weirdly enough, I see some similarities between the two that make me really curious. But even without that relation, it's very similar in the nature of "I'm different, but I'm not Wrong, and I'm still very much human." There are a lot of functional differences, and especially ones I noticed in Gagne's description of what kinds of therapy helped her the most. But maybe seeing things that way will help more people realize that reacting with fear to people who are neurodiverse in uncomfortable ways, only makes things a million times worse.
So when I saw this book was coming out, I snatched up the first copy I possibly could from the library. There was always the chance that it could have been not what I'd hoped, but I was more than willing to read it no matter what. And you know what? This book would have kept high school me invested. It's personal, it includes enough therapeutic insights to begin to be practical, and it's (hopefully!) the first step in a much larger movement to actually begin to deal reasonably with the issue, and not just stereotype everyone with it as villains and killers (and people in HR).
In a lot of ways, it reminds me of a lot of the work I've read recently on autism. And weirdly enough, I see some similarities between the two that make me really curious. But even without that relation, it's very similar in the nature of "I'm different, but I'm not Wrong, and I'm still very much human." There are a lot of functional differences, and especially ones I noticed in Gagne's description of what kinds of therapy helped her the most. But maybe seeing things that way will help more people realize that reacting with fear to people who are neurodiverse in uncomfortable ways, only makes things a million times worse.
caitlinking's review against another edition
Was looking forward to this as I thought it would be really interesting and informative. Unfortunately it’s a bit too repetitive for me and not holding my attention at all
samanthakelley's review against another edition
dark
informative
medium-paced
3.5
The first half was gripping, the second half dragged a bit to the conclusion
froon's review
3.0
reading up on this book after the fact does put a bit of a damper on the whole experience. i’m not much of a stickler for “accuracy” and “truth” in a *memoir* because… it’s a *memoir*, so i’m still rating this book as purely on the quality of the narrative and writing style (even though there is a disappointment or maybe distaste at the PhD on the cover now).
my main issue with how this narrative is constructed is the repetition. it feels like we are reading the same interactions over and over again just in slightly different situations. it would have been more successful if the narrative found the most important instances and gave weight to those instead of them getting lost in the redundancy of each interaction. the narrative really starts to fall apart when gagne moves to california. we’re stuck, much like herself, in these endless cycles of “i’m a sociopath!” declarations and the consequences. i understand maybe trying to mirror the author’s own experiences, but at a point it just seemed excessive.
another grievance i had with the narrative was the lack of resolution and clarity. yes, real life is often messy and unfinished but this is a piece of writing. it’s a heightened (even… sensationalized) version of reality. a good memoirist constructs story arcs from their life. however, i think gagne has trouble with effectively communicating those arcs because she struggles with clear expressing her thoughts. this is especially evident in the dialogue scenes. while they’re punchy and interesting (and oh so enhanced), they often pick up and drop topics in a way that feels unsatisfying. i remember first feeling this in gagne’s conversation with her psychology professor in her first year of college and found it to persist. it’s also true in her conversation with her therapist when she’s trying to explain the positives of sociopathy. the through-lines seemed crossed and messy. and this is not from a lack of believing that sociopathy (or neurodivergence in general) can offer unexpected or unrecognized strengths; instead, i found that gagne, though she speaks with confidence and authority, fails to properly communicate her thoughts (even when she has full control and edit access over the dialogue).
now, that sounds like a lot of negatives, but i really did enjoy parts of the book, especially the beginning. there is a charm to gagne (lol) even as she commits dubiously legal to illegal acts while trying to figure out her neurodivergence. there are moments of relatability when she talks about all the people around her, especially her classmates, being able to tell that something is off about her. the saga with baby was also super interesting, and i think that was the part when gagne was most accurately communicating her thoughts through the lens of retrospect.
overall, this was a fascinating read, despite the failings of the writing style and narrative. i feel like it could have been even more interesting with further introspection and psychology (which became my favorite parts once that cali years started). this would be a great book club book!
my main issue with how this narrative is constructed is the repetition. it feels like we are reading the same interactions over and over again just in slightly different situations. it would have been more successful if the narrative found the most important instances and gave weight to those instead of them getting lost in the redundancy of each interaction. the narrative really starts to fall apart when gagne moves to california. we’re stuck, much like herself, in these endless cycles of “i’m a sociopath!” declarations and the consequences. i understand maybe trying to mirror the author’s own experiences, but at a point it just seemed excessive.
another grievance i had with the narrative was the lack of resolution and clarity. yes, real life is often messy and unfinished but this is a piece of writing. it’s a heightened (even… sensationalized) version of reality. a good memoirist constructs story arcs from their life. however, i think gagne has trouble with effectively communicating those arcs because she struggles with clear expressing her thoughts. this is especially evident in the dialogue scenes. while they’re punchy and interesting (and oh so enhanced), they often pick up and drop topics in a way that feels unsatisfying. i remember first feeling this in gagne’s conversation with her psychology professor in her first year of college and found it to persist. it’s also true in her conversation with her therapist when she’s trying to explain the positives of sociopathy. the through-lines seemed crossed and messy. and this is not from a lack of believing that sociopathy (or neurodivergence in general) can offer unexpected or unrecognized strengths; instead, i found that gagne, though she speaks with confidence and authority, fails to properly communicate her thoughts (even when she has full control and edit access over the dialogue).
now, that sounds like a lot of negatives, but i really did enjoy parts of the book, especially the beginning. there is a charm to gagne (lol) even as she commits dubiously legal to illegal acts while trying to figure out her neurodivergence. there are moments of relatability when she talks about all the people around her, especially her classmates, being able to tell that something is off about her. the saga with baby was also super interesting, and i think that was the part when gagne was most accurately communicating her thoughts through the lens of retrospect.
overall, this was a fascinating read, despite the failings of the writing style and narrative. i feel like it could have been even more interesting with further introspection and psychology (which became my favorite parts once that cali years started). this would be a great book club book!