The Art of Embracing Imperfections – a review of Tomas Navarro’s book “Kintsugi”

In 2018, a known Spanish psychologist, Tomas Navarro, published his book “Kintsugi: Embrace your Imperfections and Find Happiness”, introducing to the discipline a more detailed approach to the question of extracting strength from life difficulties. The publication not only serves as a theoretical framework for the theory, but more importantly intends to provide the reader with concrete advice on how to benefit from tragedies and view challenges as opportunities for growth.

Navarro’s text is composed into a coherent, systematic journey from identifying one’s emotions, classifying and accepting the inevitable presence of pain in our lives to undertaking specific actions in order to benefit from the difficult situations. The author uses frequent analogies to his own life experiences as well as those of his patients or more abstract personas illustrating particular challenging events in order to evoke a sense of being understood and represented in the reader. This tool works well especially while portraying emotions that the protagonists experience, allowing the reader to understand their situation more deeply thanks to the empathetic response to someone else’s analogical condition, yet at times seems too forced or descriptive, as a result alienating the reader from the situation. Furthermore, although the recurrent use of imperatives throughout the book might serve as a motivational impulse to some, it may evoke the sense of being patronized in others. On the other hand, the use of lists, bullet points and varied visual organization of the text is extremely effective, reaching the broader audience and making the information presented in the book more digestible, therefore more impactful.

The reception of the book by the readers around the world was rather ambiguous. According to the users of the popular platform Goodreads.com, the advice shared in the text was “very basic” with “black-and-white approach to problems”, while the tone was frequently criticized for being “disgustingly patronising”. On the other hand some called it “not sophisticated, yet simple and down-to-Earth” or even “inspiring”. This book, similarly to the majority of psychological handbooks, strongly conveys the author’s opinions and principles, therefore has little possibility of being suitable and helpful for everyone. Navarro’s text no-nonsense approach and simple, genuine way of forming advice definitely appeals more to readers who are action-orientated and search for straightforward, concrete tips on how to deal with life difficulties. On the contrary, more sensitive and emotionally engaged readers might feel patronized or not connected emotionally to the content of the book.

“Kintsugi: Embrace your Imperfections and Find Happiness” is without a doubt an intriguing position for everyone interested in psychology, especially those who don’t have much experience with self-help handbooks. It provides consolidated, organized and straightforward advice on how to deal with various types of crises. Moreover, it uses real-life examples to illustrate the issues in a more approachable way as well as to offer the reader a chance of identification with the presented characters. Even though the tone or the manner of writing may not be favorable for all the readers, the text contains lots of varied advice that may appear useful for you, so why not give it a try?

Donna Tartt’s heroines: a new perspective on female representation in the author’s works

She looked over the bare, unwelcoming walls of Hampden Collage with hesitant curiosity. These brickstone colossuses were supposed to become trustees of her existence for the next couple of years. Was that what she truly wanted? To spend her life following her brother’s dreams? Surrounded by his decadent friends, air saturated with objectifying glances and sharp thoughts? She might have protested, if there was only someone to ask for her opinion. She might have objected, yet here she is, mindlessly flaunting her beauty in the background of a story written for somebody else. Here she is, Camilla Macaulay, the personification of a Greek goddess, reduced to a mere Pygmalion’s bride.

The way the American virtuoso of menacing bildungsroman, Donna Tartt, has portrayed female characters has been arising controversy for years and the example of Camilla Macaulay, the only prominent heroine of the absolute masterpiece “The Secret History”, is no exception. Although her character seems to play a crucial role in the plot development of the fan-favourite dark academia thriller, her personality seems significantly reduced in comparison to the male protagonists, such as Henry Winter or her twin brother, Charles Macaulay. In fact, over the course of the events Camilla seems to solely fulfill the part of the narrator’s, Richard Papen’s, romantic interest despite the deeply evolved portrait of male side characters analysed with multiperspectivity. Furthermore, the only paragraph in the whole novel dedicated exclusively to her description, focuses mostly on her physical appearance; all her other appearances are always used as a plot device or a way to explore a male character’s portrait. The second  heroine significant to “The Secret History’s” plot, Judy Poovey, is developed to an even lesser extent than Camilla – her character serves as a temporary romantic interest to Papen as well as a contrast between Julian Morrow’s elite student group and regular university attendees. 

This brief description of how Tartt consequently overlooks the potential of her female characters, a discussion may arise regarding the reason for this formal tendency. According to an investigation on the topic written by Mikaella Clements for The Guardian in 2019, it may have a source in the author’s predilection for creating a reliable image of teenage male narrators, who often impersonate such traits as ignorance or egocentrism. The guided narrative therefore imposes a certain perspective on the main character’s surroundings, limiting their perception of specific, female-attributed aspects of reality. The journalist also highlights the importance of a tendency to classify female characters into two categories in the majority of Tartt’s text narrated from a male first person perspective. The female world of “The Goldfinch” or “The Secret History” is full of “Camillas”: ethereal, sophisticated and hauntingly beautiful women who seem to be the personification of the narrator’s ideal, and “Judies”: vulgar, vivacious teenagers who portray all the stereotypical features of an exalted, reckless young adult. This tool may subsequently serve as a way to underline the narrators’ proneness to label the people they meet, especially those of the opposite gender whom they don’t have the possibility to understand on a more complex level. In this sense, Tartt’s novels written from the male perspective highlight the explicit differences between male and female characters, while also exposing the impact of the gender on the perception of reality and life situations. Interestingly, the author’s only text written from the point of view of a female main character, “The Little Friend”, uses the technique of third person narration, depriving the reader from the peek of reality depicted by Harriet Cleve Dufresnes. 

Although extensively explained and supported by examples in Clement’s analysis, the reason behind Donna Tartt’s decision to portray female characters in a reduced, limited way might still leave many readers sour and unsatisfied. The fact that we will never experience the events of “The Secret History” seen through Camilla’s eyes or will never get to know Pippa’s perspective on the plot of “The Goldfinch” might be disappointing, yet this narrative device definitely contributes to creating the unique and fascinating mystery behind the stories. Despite often being called anti-feminist and rudimentary, the limited insight into Tartt’s female characters’ personalities is what makes them so fascinating, unforgettable as well as stimulating to the reader’s imagination.

“The Chair” review

The Chair is a TV series which was released on Netflix a few weeks ago. This comedy drama presents a huge crisis at the fictional Pembroke University located in the USA. The new chair of the English department – Ji-Yoon Kim – is a woman of colour who has an aim to change the situation at the university. She wants to modernise it by supporting female lecturers and introducing some reforms. However, the differences between the faculty members of the English department create misunderstandings which lead to conflicts and burdens. The chair has to overcome them, analyse a complicated relationship with a fellow lecturer and bring up her daughter at the same time.

The creators of the series (Amanda Peet and Annie Julia Wyman) might have set a goal of presenting as many social issues as possible. If it truly had been their aim, there is no doubt they have achieved it. The script supervisor – Katri Billard – ensured that the simple and relatively short story (there are only 6 episodes) forces the viewers to make an analysis of present-day burdens. The first one clearly visible is conservative thinking and lack of cultural diversity  concerning the education programme at many universities. Even though it seems that equality becomes more common, there are still some institutions where white-skinned males are more privileged than their female or of colour co-workers. Kim represents in this series the groups which fight for equal rights of disregarded individuals but achieve only        a partial success. Such a situation is caused by the fact that it takes decades to change the mindsets of societies when it comes to forgetting about the conservative rules. The Chair also highlights misunderstandings which appear on a daily basis between various social groups. In the era of Me Too movement, the relations between co-workers and friends of different sexes often cause cringe and discomfort in the workplace. The fear of saying something inappropriate or crossing boundaries puts friendly relationships without any sexual context into jeopardy. The communication between younger generations and so-called baby boomers is also presented on the example of middle-aged faculty members and elderly lecturers with decades of experience. The two groups are incapable of understanding each other. While the younger generations want to improve the uncomfortable situation, the older members of the department underestimate the issue and act as if there is no need for more intensive intergenerational cooperation. Summing up, the series is relatively short but the number of burdens mentioned in it is higher than in the competing series released on Netflix.

Incredible performance of the actors also has a huge influence on the positive reception of the series. Sandra Oh created a complex character while playing Ji-Yoon Kim. She portrayed a fictional character that has many different roles: of a mother, a chair of the literature department, a woman of colour who tries to make a difference in a conservative workplace. Thanks to Oh’s abilities the viewers are provided with a detailed presentation of feelings, points of view and reasons for actions undertaken by the chair. Performance of Jay Duplass also deserves recognition. The actor had a demanding task of portraying a middle-aged lecturer who feels lost and confused after the death of his wife. Moreover, he tries to get closer to his co-worker and good friend (Ji-Yoon). As a result of giddiness, behaviour of the lecturer leads to various comic situations. The comedy skills presented by Duplass make the whole series much more entertaining and difficult not to binge-watch.

Daniel Gray Longino who is responsible for the direction of all the episodes made them easy to follow. The events are presented in a chronological order which enables viewers to pay more attention to issues presented in the series than to the plot itself. The aspect which is also vital in all of the episodes is a comedic relief. Thanks to various funny scenes, viewers are not overwhelmed with the serious situations presented in the series. Moreover, they make The Chair even more gripping.

Taking everything into consideration, The Chair is worth-watching because of amazing performances of the cast, the modern issues presented in the episodes and humorous scenes. Even though the series may seem boring at the beginning of watching, the following episodes are very likely to compensate for a slightly boring first minutes. Do not hesitate and get to know the ridiculous situations which happen at Pembroke University.

An American fever dream – review of Sufjan Stevens’ fifth studio album, “Illinois”

In mid 2004, a rising star of American indie folk scene, Sufjan Stevens, launched his fifth studio album titled “Illinois”, which brought him the enthusiasm of a broad audience as well as the recognition among music critics. The ensemble of 22 musical compositions present on the album orientates around motives connected to the state of Illinois, referring to its history, tradition and geography. Stevens’ breakthrough work perfectly combines soulful lyrics with capturing melodies, transporting the listener to a world full of brand new experiences.

The flagship single of the album, “Chicago” is characterized by a catchy melody, highlighted by a rhythmic drum background and an innovative collaboration of classical string instruments with synthesizer accompaniment, enriched by a trumpet solo in the bridge. The lyrics focus on the nostalgic retrospective of the lyrical subject’s youth. The recurring phrases of the chorus underline the motive of transience of time, leading up to a climax point at the end of the song, which imitates the blurriness and overwhelming nature of an adolescent’s memory.

The tenth track on the album, “Casimir Pulaski Day” occupies an important place in Stevens’ discography as well. The title presumably refers to a local holiday celebrated in Illinois on the 1st of March. Despite its simple melody based on repetitive strumming of guitar chords with occasional trumpet interludes, the song is characterized by an astonishingly wistful  atmosphere of longing accompanying the act of mourning a late loved one.  The text blissfully captures the tragedy of a blossoming love suppressed by the phantom of a lethal illness affecting one of the lovers. Subtle metaphors and euphemism create a tangible portrait of the situation, engulfing the listener in a breeze of ethereal misery. 

Another remarkable song present on the disc, is a historical insight into dark recesses of the past of the region. Straightforwardly titled “John Wayne Gacy Jr.”, the track tells the story of the infamous serial killer from Chicago in a completely innovative, reflective way. By using subtle euphemisms and expressions with heavy emotional connotations to portray the biography of an entrepreneur hiding horrendous secrets from the society, Stevens creates a heartbreaking, shattering poetic image matched with a shocking ending containing a comparison of the persona in the text with its main character. 

One of the most emotional, as well as the most nostalgic songs on the album is without a doubt “The Predatory Wasp of the Palisades Is Out to Get Us!”. Endowed with a quizzical title, the single tells a story of a developing feeling between two young people, full of insecurity and shyness, yet aware of its marvelousness. The sentimental mood of the song is reinforced by the subtle guitar motives in the verse melody, while the mystic nature of the first experience of love is enhanced by the powerful ensemble of orchestral instruments in the choir. Besides its undeniable artistic value,  the record definitely provides the listener with an unique, poignant experience. 

Another song undoubtedly worth mentioning is “The Tallest Man, The Broadest Shoulder”, which delivers a more lively, jazzy vibe to the album. The lyrics refer to the history of Illinois, recalling its contribution during the industrial development of the United States as well as the Civil War.  The artist uses the description of the past to reflect on the present, asking the citizens a nurturing question, sorely left unanswered: what have we become, America? This phrase could be used not only to summarize the message of the song, but also to bring out the essence of Stevens’ fifth album. By combining the unique emotionality of personal experiences and nostalgic memories with historical references, the singer creates a touching yet painfully accurate image of humanity, making it impossible to pass by without reflexion.

Without a doubt “Illinois” achieved a grand success not only in the eyes (or maybe rather ears) of enthusiastic fans, but also music experts from all over the world, obtaining  praising reviews and topping the Billboard list of “Heatseekers albums” as well as allowed Stevens’ incredible work to reach a broader audience. Besides the indescribable impact that the album had on his career, “Illinois” is a timeless source of unforgettable emotional experiences, evoking all sorts of deeply impactful feelings, from tormenting sorrow and nostalgic yearning to unadulterated excitement and pure lust for life. 

Spinning out – is it worth watching?

The new year on Netflix has started with many new shows and new seasons of the old, good ones. One series that premiered on the 1st of January is ‘Spinning Out’. It is a figure skating drama, created by Samantha Stratton, which stars Kaya Scondelario as a talented figure skater, Kat Baker. Kat is trying to make a comeback to professional skating after a dangerous head injury she had during sectionals a few years ago. However, it’s difficult for her, because mentally she’s still suffering from the fall which happened back then, as she’s terrified and not able to execute the triple jump that ended her career. 

The show combines competitive skating with many other issues, such as dating, family problems and mental health. The main character is suffering from, carefully hidden, bipolar disorder, an illness characterised by frequent shifts in mood, including extremely elevated mood called mania. Her medical condition often puts her in difficult position as her behaviour is not understood by her friends who don’t know about her illness. 

When Kat decides to come back to figure skating, she has to face financial difficulties, because her mum is spending all the money on Serena’s, her younger sister, trainings. Although Kat has always skated as a singles competitor, due to her financial problems, she takes a chance to compete in pairs skating as a partner of a bad-boy Justin Davis, whose father owns the ice rink. When they start their partnership, they don’t get along with each other very well, however, after some time, as we can expect, they manage to find common ground. Then they have a lot of personal ups and downs, but their professional career together is blooming.

There is a lot of skating included in the series, from the trainings to the ice shows and competitions. One of the American legends of this sport, Johnny Weir, has a role in the show, as Gabe, an opponent of Kat and Justin in pairs skating competitions. As a person who is not very familiar with the professional figure skating, I liked the skating in ‘Spinning Out’ very much. It just shows how beautiful but also demanding sport it is. Although all figure skaters in the show are really talented and passionate about it and the whole show is concentrated on their struggles and successes on the rink, there are also a lot of different events off of the ice, which is, in my opinion, a perfect combination.

The skating is probably not completely accurate and realistic. No athlete skater who is dreaming of winning the Olympic championship would probably spend so many nights on partying so hard as Justin does. Apart from that, the accident that Kat had a few years ago is very unlikely to happen during the jump she was then executing. But it seems to me understandable that the accident was made as so dangerous and frightening, because, otherwise, it wouldn’t make sense to create a character who is so anxious and frightened of competitive skating if the accident was less severe.

To sum up, maybe the show is not a masterpiece, but, in my opinion, it is definitely worth watching. It combines a lot of different issues that people, not only professional athletes, face, intertwining with beautiful scenes on the ice.

The Crown – a historical adaptation or a fantasy?

The Crown is a popular Netflix production, released in 2016. Despite, the ongoing debate concerning the replacement of the main role of Queen Elizabeth by Oliwia Colman in the 3 season of the show, I would rather like to put my attention into the 1 Season of the Crown. Such review, I believe could be useful to those of us who had only seen one season so far and would like to uncover its essence.

The aim of the whole adaptation is to present a biography of the United Kingdom Royal Family, the Windsor Dynasty. The show specifically concentrates on the life of Elizabeth Alexandra Mary, the current Queen of England. However, one can state a question of how adequately does the show reflects the actual life of Queens and Kings at the time? Creating a replica of the 19th century Britain seems extremely challenging for a 21st century producer. Nevertheless, the show rises to the challenge by spending a lot of money and effort on adjusting the costumes and the scenery to those significant times. While observing the outskirts of the complexed relationship between Elizabeth II and her husband Philip as well as the affair between Margaret and Peter we get a good amount of knowledge about the morale and mindsets of people at that time. In contrary to our current world any affair or romanse would not bring any serious social consequences if it involved regular 21st century people. However, in a Royal family such occurrence could have scandalous consequences. The lack of privacy of any members of the Royal Family is a determinant which brings a lot of irritation especially to Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, who is being placed in the spotlight unexpectedly.

What is more, the shocking approach to the commonwealth territories, acquired by force by the British, echoes among many other alarmingly powerful decisions the country made at the time. We see Winston Churchill, played by John Arthur Lithgow, struggling to succeed in keeping his position in the parlament in this turbulent times in the history of Great Britain. The representation of Churchill did not particularly made a positive impression on my. Original Churchill presented in the books or photographs, seems to differ significantly from the one attempted to be presented in the Series. Apart form the manners and retention of the politician, little resembles the actual picture of the British Prime Minister. In 1952, London is experiencing the Great smog, which brought thousands of deaths and expressed the lack of Queen’s executive power in the events of greater importance. This event is presented with a sufficient detail, therefore provides us with a good amount of historical knowledge. Additionally, as a caption with actual information about the event is presented at the end of one of the Series concerning smog the whole show becomes much more legitimate as it convinces the viewer that it’s aimed at sharing historical truth. Nevertheless, it is important to mention that the concentration of the series mostly on the domestic affairs, disregarding the events of Cold War or mentioning them only superficially as well as presenting rather impecunious picture of the life of ’’regular” British people plays for the disadvantage of the whole season.

Overall, the acting style succeeds in displaying the actual characteristics of the time quite well. Nevertheless, there is a lot to be improved at least in the beginning season of the series. However, such criticism cannot be fully given without watching the whole 3 seasons of the Crown. Therefore, it would be useful to leave one of many such adaptations made by Netflix to convey some part of historical truth to a subjective judgement made by each mature enough viewer of it.

THE NEW JOKER – an all right entertainment or a call for revolution?

The new Todd Phillips’ film “Joker” has been out for a few weeks and it has sparked some major controversy. This has been one of the most anticipated cinematic creations of the year, the trailer was remarkable and thrilling , but most importantly, one of the most talented living actors Joaquin Phoenix was chosen to play the main role. Few people were shocked when the new Joker turned out to be a huge financial success and a decent, memorable interpretation of a famous pop-cultural icon – the Joker himself. Many critics struggled to express their admiration and worshiped the main actor throughout their reviews. Nonetheless there were some critics who disliked the new Joker. Stephanie Zacharek from Time Magazine stated that “Joker wants to be a movie about the emptiness of our culture. Instead it’s a prime example of it”. One might wonder what factors contribute to the creation of such a division between critics’ views. 

Origins of the director Todd Phillips alone had given a reason for some skepticists to worry about the quality of the upcoming film. Aside from Joker, he is a personality known for creations such as “The Hangover” series and it is fair to assume that directors who specialize themselves in making semi-funny comedies aren’t as smooth when it comes to implementing a deep, subtle message in a film about a psychopathic, brutal killer with sexual frustrations. Admittedly some of what this film had to offer was given in a too much in-your-face kind of way. Instead of relying on the viewer’s intelligence, some messages were told and repeated to the point when you felt like an infant, who’s being explained the alphabet. Aside from that, I would never guess it was Phillips who was responsible for this film. I would’ve said it was a lovechild of Scorsese and Goddard who was the director. It has to be said that Scorsese might have had some small influence on the final product as he was one of the producers. 

The brightest element of that film is its main actor, Joaquin Phoenix, who captured that particular interpretation of Joker perfectly and ravishingly and became an instant modern Joker icon, in pair with Heath Ledger. His performance has been admired and worshiped so extensively for the past three weeks that I find it unnecessary and impossible to add anything relevant. Personally, I was stunned and amazed and bewildered and blown away. To my mind, one has to understand the Joker very well in order to express something as trustworthy and remarkable as what has been expressed in this film. I cannot imagine what the film would have been without Joaquin. He was the center of the movie and a perpetuating spirit of it. The camera very unwillingly focused on objects that were not Arthur Fleck – Joker and he was an only well-developed character in this film. 

90’s Gotham is a place overwhelmed by economic instabilities, pollution, social inequalities, collapsing institutions and growing aversion between people and classes. It is wonderfully built with depressing, dirty sceneries and dark music. Citizens seem to be tired, exploited, unmotivated and angry. The center and the fruit of that catastrophic reality is Joker, who is slowly becoming an incarnation of dark times in a dark place. However Gotham is a major hyperbole and the story itself is an epic tale. Certain distance is undoubtedly required. Even though this film may present some real issues, they are unquestionably situated inside a dummy that represents nothing more than an extreme distortion of reality. 

I cringe whenever I see people on the internet treating the latest cinematic interpretation of Joker as a role-model and cite his words from the film. People need to be reminded that Joker doesn’t represent any real ideology and is merely a dangerous by-product of an unempathetic, cruel society… that doesn’t exist, unless you live in Gotham. Events similar to those from Arthur’s life may occur in the real world and they are often consequences of similar social and economic issues. It is extremely important to address them, even in cinematic comic book adaptations. I appreciate the commentary value of the new Joker, however I don’t recommend creating an ideology around a product that was mainly  supposed to provide entertainment to the mass audience. People who do that sound unintentionally funny and embarrass themselves. 

To sum up my thoughts, I was entertained. This film presented some remarkable artistry, great acting, decent soundtrack and a captivating story. Social commentary on the other hand was too far-fetched, however it didn’t disturb my enjoyment. I left the cinema satisfied, which is not sufficient for calling it a masterpiece, but I truly recommend that movie to everyone, who hasn’t watched yet. 

~ SG

Review of “Selma”

I think that everyone should see this movie. Not only because it’s HISTORY, but also because of the way it was filmed. Honestly, I did not expect that this movie will have some kind of uniqueness. I was expecting another propaganda fitting today’s political correctness and pseudo-tolerance. I was completely wrong, the creators of the movie definitely wanted to have an impact on the audience, not on the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences jury. I appreciate that very much, because movies shouldn’t be created in order to win awards, they should be created for those who watch them because of their passion and interests, not their job.​.
I think, that the best thing in that film was the way the authors showed Martin Luther King. They showed him as a human, a human like anyone of us. He had strength and weaknesses, he had moments of collapse and moments of glory, he had very strong faith which sometimes seemed to fade out from him, he even had problems with mortgage. It was very easy to put ourselves in the situation of the main character because each spectator had opportunity to find similarities which connected him to Martin L. King.
Another thing, that I liked very much was focusing on the historic facts, which was preserved in a significant way. It was easy to notice that this story isn’t a fairy tale. Even the FBI files were used, which caused a feeling that the historical climate is reflected excessively, but in a such kind of film, it is necessary to stick to the facts because every single inconsistency with the truth will be found and touted as a bias.
The last thing, which seemed unique to me was the climax of the whole movie. It was the speech of Martin Luther King in a front of governor Wallace’s office. The beautiful summary of the current victories and a vision which simply means to continue the fight for the laws connected with the further stories of the characters. After that moment all of my hesitations were gone. I was only sitting and listening to M. L. King’s words which really seemed hypnotizing to me. After that, closing credits appeared and I realized that it was worth seeing such a excellent movie about a man who had enough courage to change the current state of affairs despite the fact that he was only a human.

Piotr Grobelny