What do you think?
Rate this book
340 pages, Hardcover
First published August 4, 2011
Let's begin... I never took a psych class in college, and I am essentially self-taught in history, but I could tell almost immediately that I was going to agree with virtually nothing Ghaemi said. First, his definition of madness is purely limited to mania and depression, which I find insulting to anyone who finds themselves on the bipolar spectrum. It is also very clear that Ghaemi found very specific leaders to analyze and then picked out certain characteristics to fit into his thesis. For example, Ghaemi writes about Martin Luther King's suicide attempt as if this is breaking news and that he and he alone was able to uncover MLK's secret pain, and this was the source of his depression, and thus his success.
On this history side of the book, Ghaemi often applied hyperbole in order to make a literary or psychological thread connect. Continuing with MLK, what may have been my single biggest historical issue with the book was when he equated slavery with segregation (76). We can all agree that segregation was an evil practice and, of course, related to slavery through the ingrained racism in the South, but come on! Do you have to make me say it? Slavery is not the same as segregation.
This book is filled with contradictions, tenuous connections, and weak arguments. I do not understand how this book was even published given how ridiculous it is at times. And, as a final note, there are no women mentioned in this book. That may just be enough of an oversight to be unforgivable in and of itself.
Just awful.