Just Finished Reading: The Sage of Gunnlaug Serpent-tongue by Anon (52pp] 

Dreams cannot easily (or safely) be ignored. So, when Thorstein Egilsson dreamt of two great eagles fighting to the death on top of his house, he sought advice from the local wiseman. The inference was clear. Thorstein’s wife was about to give birth, and she would produce a daughter of surpassing beauty who men would fight and die over. To avoid such a fate Thorstein instructed his wife to leave a daughter exposed to the elements and the wolves but to keep a son. This she promised to do... but fate is a trickster and a mother's love is not to be trifled with.....  

I’ve come across the Nordic saga’s many times over the years but have never actually read any of them – even extracts such as this. That might change after enjoying this slim booklet. I think the first thing that struck me was how similar to Greek myths they are (and not wholly based on the fact that I’m presently reading a book steeped in Greek mythology. The idea of Fate and the fact that it cannot be avoided – except is VERY exceptional circumstances – is central to both ‘belief systems’. Even the Gods themselves must bend before the Fates, so mere mortals have little chance as this tale shows. As usual the very fact of trying to avoid a fated outcome brings it about. “Fate, it seems, it not without a sense of irony”.  

The other thing I noticed/liked was the scattering of insights into the Nordic/Anglo-Saxon civilisations of the time as various characters (most especially the eponymous Gunnlaug) travelled around the North Sea with visits to Norway and England as well as travels within Iceland where the sage is based. Although the tale itself was only written down around 1270-1300 the action takes place around 990-1010 which I’m moderately familiar with reading around the Battle of Hastings and the Norman Invasion. My background reading made the customs and some of the main characters – Kings mostly – readily understandable. If you’re interested in the period and ever wondered about the Saga’s - and even wondered if you might want to read a complete one – this is definitely an entry port for you. Recommended.  

Erm.... You can't park there, mate!

Happy Birthday: Jean-Paul Charles Aymard Sartre (21 June 1905 – 15 April 1980) was a French philosopher, playwright, novelist, screenwriter, political activist, biographer, and literary critic, considered a leading figure in 20th-century French philosophy and Marxism. Sartre was one of the key figures in the philosophy of existentialism (and phenomenology). His work has influenced sociology, critical theory, post-colonial theory, and literary studies. He was awarded the 1964 Nobel Prize in Literature despite attempting to refuse it, saying that he always declined official honours and that "a writer should not allow himself to be turned into an institution."

Sartre held an open relationship with prominent feminist and fellow existentialist philosopher Simone de Beauvoir. Together, Sartre and de Beauvoir challenged the cultural and social assumptions and expectations of their upbringings, which they considered bourgeois, in both lifestyles and thought. The conflict between oppressive, spiritually destructive conformity (mauvaise foi, literally, 'bad faith') and an "authentic" way of "being" became the dominant theme of Sartre's early work, a theme embodied in his principal philosophical work Being and Nothingness (L'Être et le Néant, 1943). Sartre's introduction to his philosophy is his work Existentialism Is a Humanism (L'existentialisme est un humanisme, 1946), originally presented as a lecture.

Sartre's primary idea is that people, as humans, are "condemned to be free". He explained, "This may seem paradoxical because condemnation is normally an external judgment which constitutes the conclusion of a judgment. Here, it is not the human who has chosen to be like this. There is a contingency of human existence. It is a condemnation of their being. Their being is not determined, so it is up to everyone to create their own existence, for which they are then responsible. They cannot not be free, there is a form of necessity for freedom, which can never be given up."

This theory relies upon his position that there is no creator, and is illustrated using the example of the paper cutter. Sartre says that if one considered a paper cutter, one would assume that the creator would have had a plan for it: an essence. Sartre said that human beings have no essence before their existence because there is no Creator. Thus: "existence precedes essence". This forms the basis for his assertion that because one cannot explain one's own actions and behaviour by referring to any specific human nature, they are necessarily fully responsible for those actions. "We are left alone, without excuse." "We can act without being determined by our past which is always separated from us."

Sartre maintained that the concepts of authenticity and individuality have to be earned but not learned. We need to experience "death consciousness" so as to wake up ourselves as to what is really important; the authentic in our lives which is life experience, not knowledge. Death draws the final point when we as beings cease to live for ourselves and permanently become objects that exist only for the outside world. In this way death emphasizes the burden of our free, individual existence. "We can oppose authenticity to an inauthentic way of being. Authenticity consists in experiencing the indeterminate character of existence in anguish. It is also to know how to face it by giving meaning to our actions and by recognizing ourselves as the author of this meaning. On the other hand, an inauthentic way of being consists in running away, in lying to oneself in order to escape this anguish and the responsibility for one's own existence."

Just Finished Reading: The Shortest History of The Soviet Union by Sheila Fitzpatrick (FP: 2022) [230pp] 

I remember, back in the very early 80’s, sitting in an A Level Law class when the teacher asked us all a question. She was a typical Middle Class ex-hippy, and I liked her a lot. She asked us if we were worried in any way by the fact that the Soviets were pointing nukes at us and that we could all be dead with a few minutes notice. After a few others had expressed their opinions, I said that sure we KNEW that we all could be dead by the push of a button somewhere in Moscow, but it wasn’t anything to lose a night's sleep over. Such is the callowness of youth I guess... But there was something else too. I had been born into the Cold War, grew up in it and ‘matured’ in it. When the Soviet Union dissolved completely in December 1991, I had spent a little over 30 years with the possibility of nuclear annihilation always present. After a while you just get used to it. 

Spending almost half of my life with the Soviet Union as an ever-present force in the world has made me moderately obsessed about the Cold War world in particular, but with an almost equal fascination with the 1917 Revolution that started it all off. I’ve mentioned before here that we had a student teacher who covered the Revolution in GREAT depth for about 6 weeks one term, and it was DEEPLY ingrained into my brain for decades afterwards. It's a very interesting story and has helped to shape the world ever since. Obviously, as you might imagine, that’s exactly where this excellent fast paced history started its journey.  

With a successful Revolution under his belt, Lenin and his fellow Bolsheviks consolidated the hold on Mother Russia – after a brutal Civil War and much upheaval – with Plans and a rather unhealthy dollop of misplaced Marxist ideology. Needless to say, this was rather less successful than hoped and Lenin’s successor – Stalin – decided that only drastic measures would do. What followed was, by any measure, brutal resulting in millions of dead – peasants, workers, soldiers and intellectuals. It’s hardly surprising that the initial attack of the Wehrmacht in 1941 (Operation Barbarossa) was SO successful as there were so few talented people left to oppose it. 

The death of Stalin in March 1953 changed everything and the sigh of relief across the USSR must have been quite something to experience. When Nikita Khrushchev finally took the position of premier in 1958 things had already begun to relax and the Soviet economy entered its era of extended growth. It was, albeit briefly, a good time to be a Communist. I was too young to remember the Khrushchev era (or the Cuban Missile Crisis he gave to the world), but I do remember Leonid Brezhnev who was Premier until November 1982. I remember that, at times, the Cold War got VERY cold indeed and the RAF was intercepting Russian bombers probing our air-defence system on a regular basis. Things were, to say the least, tense.  

But by then the writing was already on the wall – both figuratively and no doubt in reality. The Soviet economy was in terminal decline and frequent changes of leaders from Yuri Andropov to Konstantin Chernenko (who only last a year in post!), to Mikhail Gorbachev (who EVERYONE remembers as the guy who ended it all almost by accident) didn’t really help. It was certainly an exciting time watching the collapse of the ‘Evil Empire’ in real-time on the nightly news. I remember a friend of mine suggesting that we book a flight to Berlin to *be there* as the Wall came down. Practicalities prevented that from happening, but we did think about it for a while whilst watching the BBC News. 

As a leading authority on the topic, it comes as no surprise that the author has produced a gripping and informative book the Soviet Union. I enjoyed it immensely and it’ll definitely be on my ‘Best Books of the Year List’ early in 2026. If you’re too young to remember what it was like to live in a world of two deeply opposed ideological nuclear powers with their fingers hovering over RED buttons this is definitely for you. Those who did experience living with the frisson of global destruction at any moment will find it equally interesting to see behind the Iron Curtain and begin to understand what was really happening beyond the headlines and propaganda (from both sides). Highly recommended and much more to come both from this EXCELLENT series of books and on the Cold War in all its variety.    

That's because they're not Pool tables, but Billiard tables - specifically for Carom Billiards.

From Wiki: Carom billiards, also called French billiards and sometimes carambole billiards, is the overarching title of a family of cue sports generally played on cloth-covered, pocketless billiard tables. In its simplest form, the object of the game is to score points or "counts" by caroming one's own cue ball off both the opponent's cue ball and the object ball on a single shot. The invention as well as the exact date of origin of carom billiards is somewhat obscure but is thought to be traceable to 18th-century France.

There is a large array of carom billiards disciplines. Some of the more prevalent today and historically are (chronologically by apparent date of development): straight rail, one-cushion, balkline, three-cushion and artistic billiards.

Carom billiards is popular in Europe, particularly France, where it originated. It is also popular in Asian countries, including Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Vietnam, but is now considered obscure in North America, having been supplanted by pool in popularity. The Union Mondiale de Billard (UMB) is the highest international governing body of competitive carom billiards.

[Update: The pool segments were actually shot at the Brunswick Billiard Academy, which was formerly located in the basement of the San Fernando Building at 400 South Main Street in downtown Los Angeles.]

I think I detect a fan-boy. I do wonder if that's street legal though... and I wouldn't want to see it try a speed bump!

Just Finished Reading: By the Pricking of Her Thumb by Adam Roberts (FP: 2018) [260pp] 

It was, without much doubt, Alma’s strangest case. It was no wonder that the police had requested her services as an official advisor (the plus being that she was going to get paid even if at the basic rate). The only certain thing they could all agree on was that the victim was dead. The question was: How? The only ‘weapon’ used was a needle pushed, deliberately, through the victim's thumb. No toxins were discovered in her system, no trauma, nothing. So, what killed her exactly? Reluctantly, Alma agreed to take the case and, with her partner, started looking into possibilities... But lightening does indeed strike twice. Before Alma had more than viewed the body another even stranger case arrived and this one could pay very well indeed. One of the four richest people on the planet – from a group inevitably known to all as the ‘Fab Four’ - wanted Alma to investigate the death of one of the Four. The problem was that it was uncertain exactly who had died or how... Or when. The ‘Four’ had developed an online Gestalt and it was ‘off’ in some way. Something had changed in a hard to pin down fashion. Alma would certainly have her work cut out for her. The rich, never mind the hyper-rich represented by the Four, where not known for their willingness to open up to the police, never mind a private investigator drowning in debt.  

This was the sequel to ‘The Real-Town Murders’ that I greatly enjoyed back in September of 2023. I am a fan of well mashed genres and Sci-Fi/Crime is certainly one of them that I (generally) enjoy a great deal. Where forensic science is making crime more problematic and solving crimes arguably easier (and quicker) imagine a future with clones to mess up your DNA analysis, imagine trying to commit the perfect murder when the police have access to Time Travel.... But neither of those scenarios apply here... It’s the near(ish) future and the vast majority of people live most of their lives ‘online’ in The Shine where everything is possible – imagine a cross between the Matrix and the OASIS from Ready Player One. The ‘problem’ for the super-rich is how to make money from an existence where almost everyone can have almost everything they want for FREE. Money becomes meaningless in such a reality – unless... The Four have a variety of competing plans to monetise The Shine and if one of them is dead is that a move from one (or the rest) of the Four? How is the desire for and the move towards ‘absolute wealth’ going to play out in both the virtual and the real world. It's certainly enough to kill for, but who’s doing the killing? 

One of the great things I SO enjoy about this author is that he looks at things we’re getting used to – like Artificial Intelligence or Virtual Environments – in unique ways. He is, I think, quite the philosopher and has made me pause and really THINK about what he says more than once. I’m still mulling over one of his AI observations from his last book and consider it to be one of the most brilliant observations on the subject I’ve heard so far. Likewise, this novel is, above all else about Money, Wealth and Debt as PHILOSOPHICAL ideas (money after all hasn’t been ‘real’ for a very long time). It asks questions as fundamental as ‘What IS money’, ‘How Exactly do you Define Rich or Wealth’, ‘Is it possible – even theoretically – to be Absolutely Wealthy’, ‘What is Debt, and can it coexist in a world where “money” is more philosophical than ‘real’ and finally ‘Does money exist, indeed can it exist, in a post-scarcity world’? If you like to muse over such things and see just how DEEP the ribbit-hole goes then I think you’ll enjoy this novel. I did find it a little slow in places (quite a bit of conversations – interesting, but still) and a little self-indulgent in others (a slightly too long homage to the movie 2001) but I forgave the author these few missteps (in my mind anyway) because of the quality of the vast majority of the book. I’ve only come across this author comparatively recently but intend to read everything he’s produced. Definitely recommended for anyone looking for cerebral Science Fiction. 

Yeah.....! I've just passed TWO MILLION views.....! OK, it took me almost 20 years... But still... [lol] 

Happy Birthday: Ernesto "Che" Guevara (14 June 1928 – 9 October 1967) was an Argentine Marxist revolutionary, physician, author, guerrilla leader, diplomat, and military theorist. A major figure of the Cuban Revolution, his stylized visage has become a ubiquitous countercultural symbol of rebellion and global insignia in popular culture.

As a young medical student, Guevara travelled throughout South America and was appalled by the poverty, hunger, and disease he witnessed. His burgeoning desire to help overturn what he saw as the capitalist exploitation of Latin America by the United States prompted his involvement in Guatemala's social reforms under President Jacobo Árbenz, whose eventual CIA-assisted overthrow at the behest of the United Fruit Company solidified Guevara's political ideology. Later in Mexico City, Guevara met Raúl and Fidel Castro, joined their 26th of July Movement, and sailed to Cuba aboard the yacht Granma with the intention of overthrowing US-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista. Guevara soon rose to prominence among the insurgents, was promoted to second-in-command, and played a pivotal role in the two-year guerrilla campaign which deposed the Batista regime.

After the Cuban Revolution, Guevara played key roles in the new government. These included reviewing the appeals and death sentences for those convicted as war criminals during the revolutionary tribunals, instituting agrarian land reform as minister of industries, helping spearhead a successful nationwide literacy campaign, serving as both president of the National Bank and instructional director for Cuba's armed forces, and traversing the globe as a diplomat on behalf of Cuban socialism. Such positions also allowed him to play a central role in training the militia forces who repelled the Bay of Pigs Invasion, and bringing Soviet nuclear-armed ballistic missiles to Cuba, which preceded, and eventually precipitated, the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Additionally, Guevara was a prolific writer and diarist, composing a seminal guerrilla warfare manual, along with a best-selling memoir about his youthful continental motorcycle journey. His experiences and studying of Marxism–Leninism led him to posit that the Third World's underdevelopment and dependence was an intrinsic result of imperialism, neo-colonialism, and monopoly capitalism, with the only remedies being proletarian internationalism and world revolution. Guevara left Cuba in 1965 to foment continental revolutions across both Africa and South America, first unsuccessfully in Congo-Kinshasa and later in Bolivia, where he was captured by CIA-assisted Bolivian forces and summarily executed.

Guevara remains both a revered and reviled historical figure, polarized in the collective imagination in a multitude of biographies, memoirs, essays, documentaries, songs, and films. As a result of his perceived martyrdom, poetic invocations for class struggle, and desire to create the consciousness of a "new man" driven by moral rather than material incentives, Guevara has evolved into a quintessential icon of various leftist movements. In contrast, his critics on the political right accuse him of promoting authoritarianism and endorsing violence against his political opponents. Despite disagreements on his legacy, Time named him one of the 100 most influential people of the 20th century, while an Alberto Korda photograph of him, titled Guerrillero Heroico, was cited by the Maryland Institute College of Art as "the most famous photograph in the world".

I'm guessing that the 'Do Not Disturb' sign wasn't working.......... [lol]

Just Finished Reading: The Norman Conquest – William the Conqueror’s Subjugation of England by Teresa Cole (FP: 2016) [260pp] 

Most books on this pivotal moment in English and European history start a few years before the main event in 1066. They point out that Edward the Confessor had failed to produce an heir and that Harold Godwinson was elected to follow in his footsteps. There is often much debate as to exactly how Harold managed to be in a position to gain the throne of England – especially as it was supposed to have been promised to William, Duke of Normandy – but that’s usually the background given followed by invasion (in both the North and South), battle, defeat (or victory depending on how you look at it) and take-over. 

Interestingly, and highly informatively, this author starts by looking MUCH further back starting with Edward gaining the English throne in 1003 giving us a 60+ year run up to the cataclysm that befell the Anglo-Saxons at Hastings. This allows for a much better, much deeper, understanding as to how England ended up in the position of facing two invasions only days apart and why exactly Harold’s position was challenged so early in his reign. To be quite honest, even with my belief that I’m reasonably familiar with the era and the events covered here, not only did I learn quite a bit, but my UNDERSTANDING of things is so much better now. What made things even better, if that’s possible, was that the authors writing style and her obvious grasp of the subject was outstanding. The six-decade run-up to Hastings and the requirement of the conquering army to constantly reassert its dominance over a fractious people seemed straight out of Game of Thrones (but very much in a good way) with political manoeuvring, rather useful ‘accidents’ (it's amazing how many important people died “falling from a horse” or soon after a hearty meal/drinking session much to the immediate advantage of one group or another) [Side note: is ‘falling from a horse’ the periods equivalent of ‘falling out of a window’ or ‘shot whilst trying to escape’ that we’re more familiar with these days?] 

But let me put any false impressions in their place – this is gripping without being sensationalist. The author examines what happened, what was said to have happened (and the reasons why it happened) with a sceptical eye – after all, as we know, history tends to be written by the victors (in this case the Normans) and any pronouncements by them need to be taken with that in mind. She looks at each story, legacy or legend in turn – from the ‘arrow in the eye’ to Harold’s pledge of fealty prior to Edwards death – and critically examines each in turn, looks at the evidence (if ANY) and either decides – all too often on the balance of probabilities – which is more likely to be true. With the passing of 960 years its understandably difficult to be almost any definitive statements about the events discussed between these pages but, I think, the author makes an excellent stab at it. She didn’t let any speculation go too far but she also didn’t leave too much hanging in the air as inexplicable either. Any speculations she did make she backed up with a knowledge of how things worked – differently in Norman and Anglo-Saxon societies – plus a heavy dose of rationally informed scepticism. 

1066 and the surrounding events constantly fascinate me for understandable reasons. The Battle of Hastings that year changed the direction and fate of a whole nation. Was it for the ‘better’? That’s arguable but it would be interesting to know, rather than idly speculate, how an Anglo-Saxon nation, rather than an Anglo-Norman one, would have made its way in the world and how the present might have been different because of that. As you might be able to tell, I really enjoyed this book and will be looking forward to reading more by its author. There’s more coming on 1066 too. Very much recommended and a highlight of the year so far.   

Well, I think I'd give it more than 2 stars - definitely 3, maybe even 4. I mean, even when you turn your head REALLY quickly there's no blurring. The 3-D rendering is VERY good, even close up. The weather effects are a bit questionable though. I mean, HAIL in June? T-shirt weather in OCTOBER.... Hardly realistic now.....

Just Finished re-Reading: The syndic by C M Kornbluth (FP: 1953) [160pp] 

Charles Orsino was a low-level operative for The Syndic (The Syndicate) in New York and was rather surprised when, at the theatre, one of his own bodyguards tried to kill him. On reporting the failed hit, he was even more surprised to discover that three other hits that night had been successful. Someone was looking to start a war – but who? The Mob? Maybe, but why? Or was it the rump of the US Government holding on in Ireland? They certainly had the motivation to take the American continent back but how did they imagine they could achieve that aim after 100 years in exile? In order to find out, Orsino was to be sent into the belly of the beast and discover, if he could, the Government secret plans and return to tell the tale – if he could. 

On reflection, I’m not exactly sure why I (re)read this. Part of it, I think, was that I thought – wrongly as it turned out – that this was a work of dystopia or possible post-apocalypse which I’ve been hankering after for some reason. The blub at the back helped calling this the author’s ‘most brilliant and fascinating work’ and even boldly stating that it ranked alongside 1984 as a ‘terrifying vision of the future’. As advertising goes this was, to say the least, misleading.  

For a Sci-Fi novel of the early 50’s it wasn’t actually terrible. There were the expected heavy references to psychology and even some moderately interesting views on government, but the rest of the narrative was, at best, all rather weak. The characterisation was solidly two-dimensional, the world-building nonsensical, and the eventual outcome nebulous. For reasons unknown – except a failure to ‘give the people what they wanted’ - the US government and their military had been beaten and ejected from the country by a rebellion led by Organised Crime. If that wasn’t silly enough apparently the rest of the world's nations collapsed into primitive barbarism because their crime lords were not organised enough (ignoring Italy of course). Ireland, now at least partially occupied by US Forces, had degenerated – in FOUR generations – back to the early IRON Age... Needless to say, despite finishing this thankfully short book, I didn’t exactly enjoy it. Hopefully my next dystopia will be more fun. Not recommended.  

Personally, I put mine on my monitor stand so I can see them when I'm gaming or otherwise on-line. Presently I have Dee Dee and Dexter bobble-heads from Dexter's Lab.

Happy Birthday: Prince Rogers Nelson (June 7, 1958 – April 21, 2016) was an American singer, songwriter, musician, and actor. Regarded as one of the most influential musicians of his generation, Prince was known for his flamboyant, androgynous persona, wide vocal range, which included a far-reaching falsetto and high-pitched screams, as well as his skill as a multi-instrumentalist, often preferring to play all or most of the instruments on his recordings. His music incorporated a wide variety of styles, including funk, disco, R&B, rock, new wave, soul, synth-pop, pop, jazz, blues, and hip hop. Prince produced his albums himself, pioneering the Minneapolis sound.

Born and raised in Minneapolis, Prince signed a record deal with Warner Bros. Records at the age of 18, soon releasing the studio albums For You (1978) and Prince (1979). He went on to achieve critical success with the influential albums Dirty Mind (1980), Controversy (1981), and 1999 (1982). In 1984, Prince became the first singer to simultaneously have a number-one film, album and single in the US, with the film Purple Rain, its soundtrack and his first Billboard Hot 100 chart-topping single "When Doves Cry". The album, recorded with his new backing band the Revolution, spent six consecutive months atop the US Billboard 200 chart and won the Academy Award for Best Original Song Score. The movie grossed $70.3 million worldwide and it has been regarded as one of the greatest musical films. After disbanding the Revolution, Prince released the album Sign o' the Times (1987), widely hailed by critics as the greatest work of his career.

Just Finished Reading: The Scout Mindset – Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don’t by Julia Galef (FP: 2021) [238pp] 

Back in my youth I was always up for an argument. I generally didn’t go out of my way to start one, but I was always/often up to actively engaging in one. Part of that, being both young and rather naïve, was the (often erroneous) belief that I knew what I was talking about. I also liked ‘winning’. But that’s the young for you... 

One thing I did discover early on was that some people knew how to debate things – even abstract things – and others clearly didn’t. It wasn’t because some people were ignorant. Although I can’t deeply debate topics I know little about, I can still engage enough with the form and logic of what’s being talked about. What I found particularly interesting is when the topic was religion or belief. Back in the day I used to be a rather outspoken Atheist. As before I didn’t start the argument but was MORE than up for it (I’ve toned down a LOT since then). When a Christian said that they were happy to debate me I took them at their word. It quickly (and sometimes very quickly) transpired that they had no such intent. What they clearly had in mind was to convince me that I was wrong. OK, back then I had essentially the same objective, but I was, at least theoretically, open to the idea that I was wrong. The issue from the other side was that whilst *I* was engaging in what (to me) was essentially a philosophical argument, *they* were engaging in a personal existential one. Their religious belief was a vital integral part of their identity, and this was very much NOT up for debate despite what they originally said. It took me a while to clue into this (youth again) and learn not to jump into the debate with both feet. I transitioned to questions about how they came to their beliefs rather than if they were valid. This meant that things tended to fizzle out but at least the level of offense and feelings of personal attack were substantially reduced! These days I’m far more interest in WHY people believe certain things and not very interested in WHAT they believe. People, including me no doubt, believe lots of weird stuff and I actually find the reasons for that belief to be far more interesting than the (weird) beliefs themselves. 

So, what does all of that have to do with the book? One of the things the author brings out – not surprisingly considering the title – is that there are generally two mindsets which she calls the Soldier and the Scout. The soldier's job is essentially providing defence – so protecting what you already know and preventing outside ideas from causing confusion and unease. Its job is to stop you changing your beliefs every time you hear/experience something new or unexpected or every time the wind changes direction. This, most of the time and for most of human history, has been a most sensible approach. But whilst that can be OK if nothing, or very little, changes in the external world it’s not exactly the best strategy in a world with a diversity of people, opinions, environments or profoundly new experiences. In that kind of world you need to be open to change, you need to seek out solutions to new problems and you have to be able to question previously held beliefs about it, modify them and even, from time to time, reject them all together for new ones – ones that more closely represent the truth of things. That can be tough of course, most especially when strongly held beliefs are part of a person's core identity. The metaphor that popped into my mind was of a house. With a Scout mindset changing a picture on one of the walls or even changing the wallpaper, carpet or furniture layout might cause a bit of (temporary) upheaval and might, if you’re being particularly ‘creative’, take a bit of getting used to but in the grand scheme of things it's no big deal. Now imagine putting up a cute or funny picture in your bathroom that caught your eye in a thrift shop – but in order to hang it in place you first need to demolish the entire house and rebuild it from the foundations up. In the 2nd scenario it’s MUCH more likely that the picture will never get hung and don’t even THINK about changing the wallpaper the house came with when you moved in. 

If you struggle with changing your mind about things or want to be flexible in your approach to new information or unfamiliar modes of thought this book might help with that. The author has a very good ‘voice’ and fully understands how finding yourself in unfamiliar territory without a map or guide of any kind can be incredibly stressful to many people. Cultivating a Scout mindset, at least when appropriate or when required, can help and this interesting and thought-provoking book will provide you with the tools to do so. Despite already believing I’m primarily a Scout I still found this to be a valuable read. Definitely recommended.