Cecily's Reviews > The Alchemist

Couldn't agree more Cecily, I prefer my waffles with a bit of syrup.

What am I supposed to make of “Everything that happens once can never happen again. But everything that happens twice will surely happen a third time.”??

How did the thing get to the second happening let alone the third if it cannot happen again after the initial happening?

I think the book is a good giggle though!

Apatt wrote: "What am I supposed to make of “Everything that happens once can never happen again. But everything that happens twice will surely happen a third time.”??"

No idea!

Either you dismiss it as utter [insert word of choice], or you write a 10-page essay on it!

There is no middle way.

Lol. I like that......the bit about the 10 page essay. Well summed up.

Cecily wrote: "Either you dismiss it as utter [insert word of choice].."

Smeg or "wibbily wobbly timey wimey" :)

Smeg is slightly politer than the word I was thinking of, though closely related. ;)

Dying to know who turned you into a cynical adult!

I refer you to Philip Larkin:
http://allpoetry.com/This-Be-The-Verse

I have a special kind of affection for people who hate this miserable excuse for a book. ;)

Ha ha. Thank you, Anuradha.

I was actually horrified to read this again after a few decades.
I can see why it fired me up but it has some severe contradictions.

Ahhhh! I had heard vague refs to that poem, but never seen it. Thank you so much for the link....

It's a powerful and versatile poem. I quoted it in full in my review of Stoner.

Cecily wrote: "It's a powerful and versatile poem. I quoted it in full in my review of Stoner."

If this book was a sausage, what would you call it?

I've also turned into a cynical adult, Cecily, so I will avoid this, just like I studiously avoided The Da Vinci Code when everyone was reading it.

And I somehow doubt that you are an old cynic, Cecily.
But maybe that's just me being cynical?

Apatt wrote: "Cecily wrote: "If this book was a sausage, what would you call it?"

Are we now a double-act, with you feeding me the lines - and the sausages?

It's the wurst.
Boom boom.

Kevin wrote: "I've also turned into a cynical adult, Cecily, so I will avoid this, just like I studiously avoided The Da Vinci Code...

And I somehow doubt that you are an old cynic..."

I've effortlessly avoided the Da Vinci Code.

I'll settle for middle-aged cynic.

;)

Clearly I was a cynical adult at 22 because I loathed this book when I read it at that age. Don't you think Cecily that it's often confrontation with sentimentality that makes us cynical. We have no choice if we're going to hang on to our critical faculties. In fact you could argue that sentimentality is a form of cynicism because there's often a manipulative marketing ploy behind it. This book embodies that sentimental cynical stew to me.

Violet wrote: "Clearly I was a cynical adult at 22 because I loathed this book when I read it at that age. Don't you think Cecily that it's often confrontation with sentimentality that makes us cynical...."

Well done, you were very mature.

My father raised me to be a cynic/realist, and my mother to see the world through several sentimental layers of rose-tinted specs. The latter never worked for me, perhaps because of the background sentimentality. But I did go through a pretentious phase when this sort of pap appealled.

Hi Cecily, I refer your review of this book for my review for 'Siddharta'. If you have concern, please inform me.

Especially I love the 'superficially deep' at the beginning of your review.

I strongly second with your honest rating,I picked it up for the hype it earned and was super disappointed!

Jokoloyo wrote: "Hi Cecily, I refer you review of this book for my review for 'Siddharta'...."

Thanks, Jokoloyo, I'm flattered, especially is this barely qualifies as a review.

Jokoloyo wrote: "Especially I love the 'superficially deep' at the beginning of your review."

I enjoy an occasional oxymoron.

Samra wrote: "I strongly second with your honest rating,I picked it up for the hype it earned and was super disappointed!"

I'm sorry you were disappointed. There are many fans, but it's not for everyone.

yes yes - all the warmth and insight of a Hallmark card.

dianne wrote: "yes yes - all the warmth and insight of a Hallmark card."

Succinct and accurate. Thanks, dianne.

IF I didn't reamble during reviews, my review of this POS would be: UGH. One star.

Greg wrote: "IF I didn't reamble during reviews, my review of this POS would be: UGH. One star."

I’m not sure why this is dated 2016. I wrote it shortly after joining GR in 2008, and haven’t read the book since. Were We’re I to read it now, I might be less snarky, but more specifically critical. But I have no intention of retreading.

Gah. Can’t edit and correct autocorrect on my phone. I do know (and care about) the difference between “were” and “we’re”!

And between “retreading” and “rereading”!

I will correct on Sunday night.

Cecily, I'm deleting all friends who gave this anything past 2 stars. Total crap.

Greg wrote: "Cecily, I'm deleting all friends who gave this anything past 2 stars. Total crap."

Just as long as you don’t delete friends who make typos on their phone, late at night. 😉

Cecily wrote: "Just as long as you don’t delete friends who make typos on their phone, late at night. 😉"

Oh, Cecily, you're my favorite reviewer! You spend so much time and thought on your reviews that it amazes me. (PS...Is Megan really pregnant or is she faking.... AMERICANS MUST KNOW!!!)

Greg wrote: "Oh, Cecily, you're my favorite reviewer! You spend so much time and thought on your reviews that it amazes me. (PS...Is Megan really pregnant or is she faking.... AMERICANS MUST KNOW!!!) "

I don’t know Meghan personally, and don’t really follow the royals, but she seems to get a lot of negative press and social media comments, some of which seem rooted in combinations of the fact she’s mixed-race, American, an actress, a feminist, divorced etc. It’s more plausible to me that she is pregnant than that she’s faking.

Cecily wrote: "I don’t know Meghan personally, and don’t really follow the royals, but she seems to get a lot of negative press and social media comments, some of which seem rooted in combinations of the fact she..."

I can't imagine she'd fake a pregnancy. Why? I like here. But the headlines here paint her as this huge rebel and is being outcast from the Royals, which I don't believe either. She's pretty, dresses nice (nothing scandalous) and oh, WHAT A CATCH!!!

Greg wrote: "... headlines here paint her as this huge rebel and is being outcast from the Royals...

Well, she is quite different in many ways, and openly so. She even uses the F* word. That should be nothing but a good thing.

Greg wrote: "... She's pretty, dresses nice (nothing scandalous)..."

Debatable and debated in the hyperventilating tabloids, sadly. For example, she gets criticized for wearing trousers by the same journalists who praise Kate for the same.


* Feminism

Cecily wrote: "Greg wrote: "... headlines here paint her as this huge rebel and is being outcast from the Royals...

Well, she is quite different in many ways, and openly so. She even uses the F* word. That shoul..."

LOL, the F* word. I don't get the hoopla, perhaps because there really is none. Oh, and the Catch is the Prince, although I'm sure Meghan is a good person. I gotta say Kate is pictured as PERFECTION by the media, and that's not right either. Do Kate and Meghan have differences? I should hope so! I'm waiting for my Prince, so I vicariously enjoy Meghan's world!

I had the same reaction

Greg wrote: "... I'm sure Meghan is a good person. I gotta say Kate is pictured as PERFECTION by the media, and that's not right either. Do Kate and Meghan have differences? I should hope so!..."

She seems like a good person, and that impression is enhanced by some of the vicious negative press and comments she gets. And that's just what I - not a royal or celeb watcher - notice. I have no idea how well she and Kate get on, and don't really care. Yes, they're sisters-in-law, but very different in background and destiny, so as long as they can be friendly and polite, that should be fine. No need to be besties.

Greg wrote: "... I'm waiting for my Prince, so I vicariously enjoy Meghan's world!"

Good luck with that. The only British prince currently available is Andrew, and I couldn't recommend him! And frankly, I wouldn't recommend joining the Royals to anyone. No money worries, but little freedom. It really is a gilded cage.

Jay wrote: "I had the same reaction"

It's certainly a polarising book.

Cecily wrote: "Greg wrote: "... I'm sure Meghan is a good person. I gotta say Kate is pictured as PERFECTION by the media, and that's not right either. Do Kate and Meghan have differences? I should hope so!..."

..."

Yes, I see that, a Gilded Cage for sure. But I wouldn't mind for a few weeks...and I they might want to count the spoons after I leave. Just kidding, I'm not a thief, but if I had to steal something at gunpoint, it'd be the gun pointed at me.

To those planning to read this: just picture, say, Hugh Jackman coming to your rescue in the desert.

Greg wrote: "To those planning to read this: just picture, say, Hugh Jackman coming to your rescue in the desert."

Given how much you dislike the book, you're making it sound rather appealling. I'm almost wondering if I should reread it...!

Old school waffle is better.

Apatt wrote: "Old school waffle is better."

Indeed. But the waffles in your picture are missing a crucial ingredient: syrup! Mind you, this book has more than enough sweetness.

I read the book in my early teens, late teens and early 20s, and each time I had a different take on the book. I always tell people this book brings out what stage you are in life.

Now I am scared to read it again after 14 years and afternI have read so many bad reviews about it haha

Reza wrote: "I read the book in my early teens, late teens and early 20s, and each time I had a different take on the book... Now I am scared read it again..."

It's always a risk to reread a much-loved book, decades later. However, if you've reread it in the interim and it's still spoken to you, then maybe it will again. Good luck.

"Pretentious new age waffle" - yes indeed. It's good to be able to admit it and know that it's not just me. I have friends who just love this book! Heaven knows why.

Beth wrote: ""Pretentious new age waffle" - yes indeed. It's good to be able to admit it and know that it's not just me. I have friends who just love this book! Heaven knows why."

Well, were I to read and review it now, I might sugar the pill a little. But only a little. And I have no intention of picking it up again to test it!

I thought you kept this book on your bedside table to dip into for inspirational reading.

Michael wrote: "I thought you kept this book on your bedside table to dip into for inspirational reading."

Shhh! No one's supposed to know, or even guess that!
😉

My thoughts exactly. Had I not read it hen I was like 15 years old I wouldn've liked it. And I remember it was a teacher who suggested it to me, so I thought I was reading something really special when I now understand I was just falling into marketing.