The book thief

rating 4/5

The Book Thief is a novel by Australian author Markus Zusak.^[1] Narrated by Death, the book is set in Nazi Germany, a place and time when the narrator notes he was extremely busy. It describes a young girl’s relationship with her foster parents, the other residents of their neighborhood, and a Jewish fist-fighter who hides in her home during the escalation of World War II. First published in 2005, the book has won numerous awards and was listed on the The New York Times Best Seller list for over 230 weeks

– Wikipedia

I finished the book thief today. I didn’t know what to expect from the book because of the title. I realize that I don’t tend to read the summary of the book before I read it. I like to guess what’s going to happen from the very beginning. So I am a little confused about who is the narrator of this book.  It turns out to be the death, whose mission was to collecting people’s soul after they are physically dead.  The story happened in Nazi Germany during the World War II. It reminds me of a book I have read in high school, The Diary of a Young Girl. But this time it is from the Germany’s perspective. The main character is a young girl, Liesel, whose mother left her with foster parents in a small town in Germany. The story describes her relationship with her foster parents, friends, mayor’s wife, a Jewish fist-fighter who hide in their basement.

I like the story, it is one of the best stories that I have read recently. I am particular impressed by her relationship with her foster father. How she struggled to learn the language- how to read and write and how her father taught her how to in the basement of their house.  I like to read since human words possess extraordinary powers, more than one would have expected. Words that organized appropriately can enlighten your mood, help you find the courage to endure hardship, and offer you a way to connect with others in ways that cannot be accomplished in any other way. That’s why people speak. Another impressive part of this story is Liesel’s relationship with the Jewish guy – Max. She extended her friendship to this lonely guy who was in constantly fear- the fear of getting caught and the fear of bringing disaster to the family who hid him against the rule. The book also included two short stories written by Max, which are beautiful and touching.  Stories that give you hope in humanity.

I sometimes wonder why regular human beings are willing to put themselves in considerable danger to help other when they are not guaranteed to live to the next day.  People say that we are born selfish and evil, but if that is true, then none of those beautiful stories would happen in the real life. People who are willing to sacrifice tremendously self-interest are admirable, but little gestures that act out of a loving heart are enough in most situations.  Although decent people do not usually end up the way they deserve (just like what happened to good people in this novel), their very existence give light to all living beings.

I have read an article written by a girl on the death of her mother. She said that after witnessed her mother’s death, her outlook towards life has been forever changed. She believe what we do in our life is trying to obtain enough experience, wisdom and courage to be able to find inner peace when our own death is imminent.  I don’t see any better way to accomplish that other than starting with living one’s life with compassion, honesty and decency.

# The art of racing in the rain

最近失眠得比较严重。也不知道是为什么，可能是因为快要prelim了，也可能是因为受情绪波动的影响，也可能是因为受荷尔蒙影响。不管怎么说，睡觉都是 一小段一小段进行，于是听完了两部有声书。今天听完的是the art of racing in the rain。又是一本light read but with a heavy topic.这个世界到底是肿么了。不能不说我听这本书的主要理由是因为封面和标题。对动物没有抵抗能力啊。看书名还以为是一只狗在雨中奔跑的故事，还在内心疑惑这种故事能写一本书么？结果听了几十分钟以后发现我误会了。这个故事虽然是用宠物狗Enzo的视角来写，但是整个故事其实是很沉重的，没有狗那种欢乐的气场。讲的是Enzo的主人，一个赛车手，老婆得了脑癌，然后跟自己的in-law一家人抢自己女儿的故事。我怀疑我是不是把整个故事给剧透了，不过这点情节在很早就已经揭露了。所以应该还好。虽然整个故事确实除了用动物视角以外，没有什么新意。就连故事的情节发展都一直让我脑中浮现出一个词语，就是cliché。而且Enzo的思维相当的成熟，有声书播讲的人也是中年大叔音，也不会有什么可爱的感觉。但是我还是在结局的部分眼眶湿润了一下。最近看到两个人玩would you rather的游戏，就是在两个场景中选一个。一个人问另外一个人would you rather be able to speak any language fluently or be able to speak to animal ？ 我想了一下肯定毫不犹豫的选后者。一直觉得动物的思维肯定很单纯，如果是一只狗，说不定心里想的就是，饿了。。主人主人。。。困了。。主人主人。。饿了。。啊，一只鸟。。。。你这个死猫。。。主人主人。这样幻想着就突然萌了起来。不知不觉说走题了还是拉回来吧。总的感觉就是如果以前没有看过宠物视角的小说，听一听也不失为一种乐趣。但是因为这本书相当的流行，很多人评价都是五星，我倒是没有喜欢到这种程度。主要是觉得Enzo作为一条狗，没有任何宠物的感觉，就是一个很老成的人，逻辑思维能力，感受，说话的方式，让我总觉得没有得到看这本书应该得到的感觉。不过总的来说还是一本不错的书。最近发现我对书的评分是越来越低，以前还动不动有一本5星的，最近看了那么多连一本四星的都没有，难道是我要求越来越高了？

第二本：

Is everyone hanging out without me

这本跟bossypants差不多，也是一个喜剧作家写自己从小到大的成长经历的。是作者本人念得，还算有意思。内容比ellen的书丰富不少，不过比起bossypants还是要差不少的，但是重点感觉不同。里面说到婚姻男人的一小部分还是蛮有道理的。不过这种搞笑类的自传的书，也是平时消磨时间而听的东西，不会有太多感想。

————

昨天突然下雷阵雨，去gym游到一半，管理员过来说闪电了不能游泳。于是爬起来去shower，结果管理员又过来说，闪电了也不能shower。真是第一次听说还有这种事情。难道闪电可以通过shower把人电死？回家以后雷阵雨才正式开始下。下着下着，闪电两次以后就停电了。看来美帝国主义的电力系统也是很脆弱的。停电一直停到可能快要早上了才来。停电的过程中，发现没电的世界还是安静很多的，尤其是家里最吵的那个冰箱。想起过去的人生活在没有电力的世界里面，日出而作，日落而息，只知道邻里的家长里短，不知道万里之外的事情，这样的生活是不是会平静很多。有时候人总之说不要封闭自己，要多出去结交，但是大多数往外看结交的结果，都是自找烦恼。本来自己的内心已经很坚定，结交多了不同类型的人，反而开始动摇了。如果是往对自己好的方向动摇倒是不错，但是往往结果并不是这样。因为世界上能把生活想得透彻的并不多。

“You are perfect the way you are. “ ???

“You are perfect the way you are. “

I have to say that this sentence is something I have never heard of growing up. Sometimes, I feel such saying is unique to the western world. In China, parents and teachers are always trying to tell you that you are in need of improvement in more than one aspect.  After we achieved something, there will always be some higher goal waiting for you.  Life seems like a never ending process of improving oneself and getting rid of ones’ flaws, no matter what those flaws are.  If you are bad at something that your peers are good at, the only reason is that you are not trying hard enough.  Unrealistic expectations form others can lead to depressing and low self-esteem. However, in my mind, telling others or even yourself that they or you are perfect is even more damaging or problematic that giving them a dose of reality from early on. What is good can coming from a lie? No one is perfect, but some are obviously better than others at least in some aspects.  There is no reason to deny that. Some might think give unfounded praises to their loved ones or their kids is a good thing- as a confidence booster. For me, confidence is different from ego, and only ego can benefit from others’ compliments.  Feeling superior, special isn’t as good as it sounds since the reality will sooner or later tells you that you are nothing but ordinary (not that ordinary is a terrible thing). There are billions of people with different talents and it is highly unlikely that one can live through their lives without feeling inferior to some genius they have met along the way.  Even people who said those things to you in the first place, might complain that you could have done a better job meeting their needs. You boss would tell you that he or she is disappointed by your performance; your parents might tell you that they are unsatisfied with your job or your wife or your husband, or   the fact that you are still single. All the sudden, you are not perfect anymore.  So what to do? You could try to improve or you can tell them to get over themselves and that you are the way you are and they have told you so.

The reason I brought this up is that I have read two books this year based on the idea of “You are perfect.” Including the book I have read recently called The ending of pursuit of happiness – the Zen guide”. The author is a Zen teacher and a psychoanalyst. As the author suggests, the difference between psychoanalysis and psychotherapy is that psychoanalysis is not try to “help” or “fix” things just like Zen teaching.  After reading this book, I fully grasp the “not helping” part of his theory.  People who have problems in their lives turn to one of two ways for answers or solutions – psychotherapy or religion. According to the author, Zen teaching will not offer anything that one is looking for : It is not going to change you for the better (transformation); it cannot offer you a way to escape from reality (and it is not supposed to);  it cannot make you a better person (you are the way you are, there is nothing you can do to change that); it cannot spare your from suffering (since life is suffering).  Now if you are a rational reader, you probably will ask what Zen practice can do according the author. The answer is—prepare for it—–“Nothing”. According to him, anything else (in opposed to nothing) that you expected to find through Zen practice will end in one way – disappointment in your part since there is nothing to be found.

He even mentioned sexual misconduct(s) of famous Zen teachers in North American to prove that practicing Zen will not make one a better person, or a noble one, or a decent one. He suggests that everyone is already perfect and there is nothing one needs to fix. One just needs to come to terms with oneself and accept who he or she is and that’s it. If one has flaws, being sensitive, insecure, angry, jealous, or simple unhappy, there is nothing you can do to change it, at least, not through meditation or Zen practice. I am wondering if that is the same logic used by Zen masters in question to have sex with their students. Since you cannot change who you are and what you want, if you are born with irrepressible sex drive, you’d better go with it instead of suppressing it even if as a teacher you are not supposed to sleep with your students (master or not). I cannot see how people who do such things can be perfect in any sense, no matter how you stretch the definition of the word- perfect.

 I found that the theory in this book is hard to swallow which, by words of the author, is resistance to the truth. However, I don’t believe people cannot be changed.  Even in the book, the theory he presented is self-contradicting.  For example, he suggested that there is no inherent unchanged part within an individual that can be called “self”- that is- your personality and your thoughts are changing constantly by environment and others. It makes sense since I don’t think the same as the five –year- old me did. The only reason I know that five-year-old me is still me is that I am still in the “same” body. If this is true, claiming that there is something unchangeable about one person should not be true. However, even he recognizes the essence of Buddhism that nothing is fixed or permanent, he insists that self-improving is impossible.  Granted, changes can happen in both directions. So combining the two facts ( A : everything is impermanent and subject to change;  B: you cannot improve yourself by getting rid of your flaws/negative emotions or become a better person), the logical conclusion will be the only change one can have is going downhill. This is a pretty discouraging perspective. I assume that religion could do more than that, but according to the author, I couldn’t be more wrong. I agree that religion would not necessarily makes you a better person especially if one takes religion as a quick fix of their problems as proved by people I have known, but it has the potential of doing so. I tend to agree with the author that one should not expect to gain anything particular or to find a quick fix to their problems by becoming religious. However, simply accepting who you are and rejecting the idea of everyone should try to maximize what is good in ones’ nature and fix what is wrong within oneself  for  no valid reason other than one is already perfect seem irrational to me. I am not a religious person, but I doubt anyone would want to become religious after reading this book.  I want to ask the author that if what he said is true, if truly there is nothing to gain by practicing Zen and everyone is already perfect, why he bothers to practice in the first place?

Or by unchangeable he was referring to ones’ character traits (negative ones) that one can never hope to get rid of. For example, the urge to have inappropriate sex, be judgmental, selfish, overly sensitive, and unsympathetic. “You can not will yourself into change ” as suggested by the author. However, who is there to decide what is(are) the inseparable part(s) of humanity? Just because you couldn’t do it, doesn’t necessarily mean such thing cannot be done. There is something that worth achieving regardless of ones’ genetic makeup. People share 98%-97% of genes with gorilla doesn’t make us act like them 97%-98% of the time. The education plays a large part in how people think they should behave and all those are not genetic. People should stop finding excuses for having low moral standards.

The truth about forever – book review

It is a light summer read with a subject that is quite heavy. The first part of this book is thought-provoking, but that’s about all the things that I like about this book. I found main characters of this book have personalities that I don’t like. This story is about a 16 year old girl who lost her father in one morning. A lot of reviewers say that this is a beautiful book, but I cannot see it. It is not fitted into my idea of beautiful since I feel the leading character is self-absorbing and make a lot of assumptions about others. Until the end of the book, the author reveal the truth about forever is essentially that forever can end in any minute. So live in the moment.  I guess I should not expect a YA novel to inspire me of a new interpretation of the word forever. In addition, If this is a book about how to grief and how to deal with the fact that your loved one is gone, I didn’t see the solution. The girl Macy started a relationship at the end of the book, and that’s it. Is the author telling me that the way to cope with lost is finding someone new to love? The ending left me wondering — the book begins with a girl could not face the death of her father and could not talk about it even with her mother or sister and ends with her finding a new boyfriend. Life just moves on no matter what.  Enjoy whatever you have right now and forget about what you have lost in the past. I can see and agree to the logic, but the whole thing has nothing to do with the word forever. If anything, it is the exact opposite of forever.  I guess the conclusion will be the title of this book is where the problem lays.

For me, as long as you are a living being, there is no such thing as forever. The ultimate truth about forever is that it doesn’t exist. Everything has a beginning will come to an end, even the whole universe in its current state is not meant to last forever (as far as the science can tell). The logic of this author is to deny the impermanent of things instead she offers that thing can be permanent for an hour, a month or a hundred years.  Some say this is a good book on a hard subject but without being depressing. I somehow found this comment to be funny. I would like to read a book offer you some insight on how to cope with death and change if only the logic makes sense.  I doubt anyone who goes through lose would find any inspiration from this novel since it offers no solution or inspiration. If you don’t happen to make new friends or encounter a gorgeous but troubled boy immediately after you have lost your loved one, you are doomed. In conclusion, this book only suitable for people who don’t  want to contemplate on the topic of death instead they want to know all is well. I think the way to deal with loss only lay within oneself, and no one can just give it to you. The presence of other people can only offer you as much as a distraction, nothing more.

I have thought a lot about death, not suicidal thoughts obviously. The fact that I grew up in a hospital means that I have witnessed a lot of them.  People won’t start to be afraid of death unless they have been diagnosed with deadly diseases or they have reached an age to have reason to be afraid of it. Other times, we just act as this  is out of possibilities. I guess that can be called as wishful blindness since people assume (sometimes rightly so) thinking about death causes depressing, since there is no way out.  Some people might turn to religion for ways towards immortality. Logically speaking, there is no reason to fear for one’s own death, since you as a person by definition won’t be there to experience the deprivation.  I am not afraid of thinking about it sometimes be interpreted as I don’t want to live. I certainly want to live as much as others, but I just do not think turning a blind eye from something is certainly going to happen is logical to do. There are few definite things in our life. People dislike uncertainty, so they go at length trying to avoid it. We like promises and things make us feel certain and safe, despite the fact things rarely happen according to our expectations. “I did not see this coming” is a common phrase.  Death is only certain in one aspect, but not in others. We only know it is going to happened but not how, when, where, and why.  So the fear of death might also be related to the fear of uncertainty or unknown. No one can tell you what is like to be dead. Just like before we were born no one has told us what is like to be alive. So babies must feel terrified when they first see the world. But they cry, they smile, and they start to learn how to live. So why we just accept what is going to happen without fear or rejection or denial, even if we know nothing about it. If we don’t know how to deal with the problem we are facing, we just have to live through it, and live to the answer.

From the bright side, thinking about how things would end, might remind you to appreciate the fact that it is still on-going at this moment.  Be happy for what you have.

rating: 2.5/5

今日感想

今天看漫画，里面说为什么PhD是Doctor of Philosophy，but not Doctor of Science or Doctor of Engineering or etc. 因为你在读phd的期间经常会问自己一些哲学问题。比如我为什么读这个学位，我的生存的意义是什么。而且PhD期间没有个人生活，各种压力，没几个钱也让为你创造了问这些问题的环境。所以你毕业以后毫无意外的变成了一个哲学家。这跟以前听过的，一个人男人如果有一个坏老婆，就会变成哲学家有异曲同工之妙。我看我这么下去，离哲学家的目标不远了。然后在华人上看到有人问有没有人担心自己一事无成，下面一堆人各抒己见，我很想说，如果一个人什么都干不成的过一辈子，也许到死前也会变成哲学家。

今天总算是把prelim的东西发给了我的committee，在发出去之前，盯着email看了十几分钟。我也不知道我在怕什么东西。 有人跟我抱怨自己不喜欢生物是因为付出得不到回报。也许是真的。但是这个世界上付出得不到回报，或者说你想要的那种回报的应该很多。原因很多，1，你没这个命 2，你运气不好 3，你付出的还不够多。人在看自己对某件事的付出的时候总会觉得自己付出已经很多了，看别人的时候就会觉得别人啥都没干。但是事实是否真的如此呢。她最近上了一门课，里面第一节课教R，然后她问我怎么把console里面已经执行过的程序删除，我说你以为是这是word啊想删就删。然后她问我为什么保存程序只有code没有运行结果。然后感慨还是编程有意思，比生物实验简单多了。我就说你拿cs里面的小学算术跟phd期间做的生物实验相比公平么。你就上了一节45分钟的课，学会的那点东西，如果让我拿45分钟去教一个学计算机的做生物实验，我还不知道那个实验得多简单才有可能得到正确的结果。公平一点来说，生物phd的难度跟很多专业相比确实是很困难的，很多东西都很随机不可控，但是就因为这个就说别人的日子很容易也不尽然吧。我只想说很多人觉得生物痛苦只是因为在读phd，你在本科的时候很显然是不觉得痛苦的，要不你也不会选择过来读phd。编程也是一样，你只学了45分钟以后得出的结论，是没有办法衍生到你读phd的时候的感受的。难道学CS的人讨厌coding的人还少了吗。所以当别人问我为啥高中就去考计算机等级，但是却没读计算机专业的时候我就说，本来这就是一个爱好，如果把它当专业就痛苦了。想了很久，我还是觉得人应该努力做好当下的事情。因为一个世界是什么样子的，全看你要怎么去理解和定义它。任何事情当你要把它做得比别人好，都是很困难的。你不觉得困难，只是你还没有走到哪一步。

Something I have learned today.

Today, I watched some TV show online.  There is one line that I remember:” If you truly love him, you should do what is right for him, not what is comfortable for you. “ (referring to whether to tell one guy’s parent that he has been doing drugs and she promised not to tell .)

This line makes me think about my past. How I just let people do their things even if what they are doing probably bad for them in a long run. I always think I am being considerate/open-minded/non-judgmental since I should not be the one who decides what is best for them. They should be deciding that for themselves. If one is happily going down the path of self-destruct, that is their choices, and there is nothing I can do about it.  Moreover, no one wants to hear my advice. However, on the back of my mind, I think the reasoning behind my action is not ideal or is wrong.  I sometimes question my own motivation behind my actions. Am I too lazy to try to change others or at least, to say something to make them re-consider their activities of self-destruct?  Am I just afraid of giving advice because I do not want to be responsible for the consequences?  I have to admit whether or not to give others advice or change others could be a difficult question. Interfering too much is annoying, but not saying anything at all might be interpreted as not- caring at all. I agree with that line. If you want the best for people you care, you need to risk others hating you for it, like what your parents would have done for you. I admire when people have the courage to say to their loved ones that I know you will hate me for a while for this, I can take it. Doing the right thing is not easy.

Although I am reluctant to give others advice or stop others doing what they are trying to do, I have no problem accepting others’ advice.  More often than not, I appreciate others when they try to interfere with my business if I can see their reason behind that. I remember a few years back, once I went to grocery shopping with some guy I have met for the first time, I tried to pick up some interesting looking fruits. He just stopped me and said :” You should not buy since you already have enough food for today” (I was traveling at that time).  I was a little speechless at that moment thinking why you would care how I spend my money, but I listened because I can see he has a point.

I don’t have the habit of listening to others when I was young and I dismissed the comment that people who tell you not to do things are the one who really cares about you.  Now I know that normally, it would be much easier just let others have their way as long as their actions would not directly impact you. If you say something for their own good, they might resent you for it. So why bother? Understanding this is the beginning of my transformation from a person who listens to no one to a person who considers and follows people’s rational advice.

Ever since I start to appreciate others’ advice, I grow fond of others more easily – which is a good thing. While some might try not to like others easily since one might get hurt if others don’t feel the same way, I rarely think like that. Having good feelings towards others makes me happy and it doesn’t have to do with how they feel about me.

A role model or a Shameless liar – reading notes.

I read a book recently, called

Bend, Not Break: A Life in Two Worlds

 by Ping Fu.

I came across this book due to pure coincidence or more appropriately described a mistake a few months ago.  At that time,  I read a free book/document really popular among PhD students in US and China –The PhD Grind by Philip Guo (written by a PhD graduate from Stanford, majored in Computer Science), which, by the way, is a great book. After read that book, I went the website of the author (Philip Guo) and Ping Fu’s book somehow appeared on that website, so I mistook her book as another book that Guo has written. Now I realized that it might be some random advertisement just happened to be there. Anyway, that’s why I brought this book – bend, not break. I only started to read it a few days ago without any knowledge of what this book is about.  Now move on to the book.

I was really impressed by the author’s life story and her ability to tell a story. I was instantly absorbed to the story. The story goes like this : A girl grew up in a wealthy family until the outbreak of China’s  Cultural Revolution. She was separated by Red Guards from her family, and then had to take care of her little sister at age of eight. During that time, she went through extensive torture and abuse (including be gang-raped at age of ten) . Then at age of 25, she was deported by Chinese government and came to US and began her legendary life experience from being a waitress to a CEO of a company specialized in 3D printing. Despite the hardship she had to go through over those years, she always remembered to be like bamboo, bend but not break, to be like a pine tree, strong and be like plum blossom-courageous. On top of that, she treated people who had humiliated her with forgiveness and kind. And many more.  How could you not be impressed by this girl, now a successful CEO in US? If only her story was true.

Her story only appeared to be true to me because I am too young to experience the Cultural revolution first hand myself. I don’t know much about it, and I have heard much about it either although both of my parents have been thourgh that period of time. My father got sent to the country side for labor for a while and his brother faked disability in order to stay at home. Over those years, I have heard nothing about what really happened during that period. I knew it was dark-teachers and professors were prosecuted by their teenager students. However, even as naive as I, I found her story suspicious, starting from the very beginning of the book  that she got deported to America because of some article she wrote in 1980s. For one thing, if someone pissed his or her government off, the last thing authorities would do is sending her or him off to another country. What do they try to accomplish by doing that? If she said she was escaped to America since she couldn’t stand the torture, I might have believed her story. Not until the end of the book, I  learned what she meant by being deported or exiled by Chinese government — an authority called her and asked her to leave the country and never come back —- after she already asked her father’s student who studied in US to secure her a position as  ESL student at University of New Mexico. When I was reading this sentence, I was like ” Seriously? You could have done a better job lying.” For one thing, since when Chinese government start to just call people on the phone instead of just coming at your doorstep and locking you up ?

Ping Fu must think all people in this country are too gullible to spot her lies, or she is counting on labeling all critics as people working for Chinese government and/or who got brainwashed by Chinese government (apparently that has already happened), so she can cater to her American boss and get them to believe her outrageous lies?   That reminded me something I have read before, “you don’t have to be logical and providing evidence to back up your statement when you are in a disagreement with others ,only thing that you need to do is questioning other party’s motive. As soon as you labeled them as being brainwashed, you win. ”  In this particular case, despite piling evidence against her words and her self-contradicting stories over these year, some people still stand up for her and smear anyone who questioned her book as “Chinese nationals” and “Communists”. I have to agree her plan is a solid one because it is impossible to lose an argument that way.  When I first got to this country, my landlord who is an American woman in her 40s, asked me if it is true that  I cannot get married in US since Chinese government won’t allow me to. Now I can see where those misunderstandings are coming from (more than one outrageous liars).

There are many inconsistencies in her story that some reviewers have reviewed extensively on Amazon so I will not repeat. One of the longest is http://tiny.cc/6jkw1w .Since it is too long, the author had to published somewhere else.

Things I remember in her book was when she arrived at US, she was penniless. She didn’t even have five extra dollars to pay the fee at the airport. I was like “you have the money to buy an airplane ticket from China to US, but you don’t have five dollars in your pocket the second you got off that plane? Seriously insulting people’s intelligence. At that time, I thought maybe she get deported by Chinese government, so the government brought her the ticket. Now I know that is not the case, it was her own choices (she admitted that she wasn’t expelled by Chinese in an interview). Then how exactly did she get here? You can just tell Americans (Visa officers) that your country asked you to leave, they will just give you the visa to come to US even when you have absolutely no money at all? Even today, financial statements and proof of income of your family if they are the one supporting you (pay for tuition, living expense and etc) are required to apply for a visa to come to US. If her penniless story was true, then she must have faked her financial statements when she applied for the visa which is breaking the law. Why US government does not deport her back to China then? (Btw, US citizenship and immigration services award this lair outstanding American by choice in 2012 based on her lies . I am wondering how they feel about it now.)  Awarding one of the biggest liar when it comes to obtain legal status in US.Even at the end of the book, she mentioned this award, she wrote things like “I did not come to US by choice and I had to come). She later admitted that she came here willingly, not being deported as she described in the book and then admitted that some stories in her book are her imagination. Oh? Autobiography is about people telling life stories only happened in one’s head.

She then mentioned in the book that after five years (in 1989) she was in US, she didn’t have any personal life and cannot fit in. However, she was married at Sept, 1986 to an American citizen according to her interview and only got divorced three years later. So she thought getting married was work (since she claimed to have NO personal life) and married an American seemed did nothing for her in terms of “fitting in”. Even worse, she didn’t mention a word about her first husband in the entire book and went at length to hide it and made her first few years at America seems like a person who lived totally on her own. When questioned why she didn’t mention her first marriage, she said it was to protect the identity of that guy. Interesting, like people cannot look your up online. Marriage is public record. She apparently doesn’t remember when she graduated from college and what she did between her graduation and her deportation to US. When people asked her about that during an interview, she said” this is a good question, I have to verify for that” For what? I will remember that period of my time forever. If anyone has asked me the gap between my college graduation and the day I came to US, I will give a detailed account of those events to the exact date without the need to verifying anything. Only reason she has to verify “back home” is that if what she said of her past were all outrageous lies since people tend to forget about details of their lies. If one cannot remember things happened in one’s twenties, how she can remember what happened in her childhood (active imagination then). She also claimed to know only three English phrases at the time she arrived US while all college students were required to learn English for four years. The genius Ping who didn’t even know what dose ” take a break” mean after years of English class she had to take in College, but somehow managed to get both a master degree and a bachelor degree in Computer sciences and found a job only five years after she arrived US (she studied literature in China). Is she a genius in all others things but the language? She mentioned in the book, she didn’t even know about fractions when she first took the calculus class in US, but if that is true, how can she get into college back in China through taking one of the most competitive national college entrance exam in China’s history including subjects like math/chemistry/physics). How gullible she thought her readers are?

I will continue no more. The only reason why I wrote this at the middle of the night is partially due to my frustration towards this book itself (I spent hours reading it and only find out it is a book full of lies) and partially because the questioning her book started back in Jan and I didn’t know about it until I almost finished this book. If I knew about this, I would save myself some time. I feel bad I even considered recommending this book to my friends when I first started reading it. I should have known what I can get from reading an autobiography written by a business woman who majored in literature ( an excellent combination for people who are good at making stuff up). This would serve as a reminder to myself that I should avoid such a book in the future, seriously, what I am thinking.

I know most Chinese and Chinese immigrants out there will not believe what she has said in that book, since those lies are just to easy to spot for people has lived in China before. You don’t even have to like Chinese government at all to call her a liar. So just save you guys sometime, If you ever read that book, you can read it as a pure fiction (you will learn a point or two from it). However, I hope how to learn how to lie shameless will not be a part of it. For others who know nothing about China, or only things that your government has told you through those years, this would be an excellent book for you to read, since it would fit your idea of China perfectly. I am not bothered about the image of Chinese government since in my opinion, its image cannot be worse. If you simply want to learn something about China, I cannot think of any book can be worse than this one for you to start. What this woman tried to do is just promoting herself and her company by making up stories. Spend your 27 dollars elsewhere.

一本为我写的书-Reading notes

Some quote：

Whether or not there is some agency bigger than ourselves, controlling the way things unfold, each one of us clearly has very little individual control over the universe.

 

The wisdom of understanding the limits of your own.

 

If your strategy for happiness depends on bending circumstances to your will, this is terrible news: the best you can do is to pray that not all that much will go wrong and try to distract yourself when it dose.

 

The only things we can truly control, the stoics argue, are our judgement-what we believe- about our circumstance.

 

And tranquility was to be achieved not by strenuously chasing after enjoyable experiences, but by cultivating a kind of calm indifference towards one’s circumstances.

 

I don’t need to feel distressed by a judgement that it ought not be happening. Because it is happening.

 

this points to the troubling possibility that your primary motivation in taking the decision wasn’t any rational consideration of its rightness for you, but simply the urgent need to get rid of your feeling of uncertainty.

 

The truth that many people never understand, is that more your try to avoid suffering, the more you suffer, because smaller and more insignificant things begin to torture you, in proportion to your fear of being hurt.

 

For the Stoics, the realization that we can often choose not to be distressed by events, even if we can’t choose events themselves, is the foundation of tranquility.

 

– The Antidote：

Happiness for People Who Can’t Stand Positive Thinking

评价 4/5

这本书基本上就是为我写的。或者说是为了让我领会到我以前观点的理论依据的书。其实之前我对快乐的理解就是平静的心态，不是激动不是兴奋，不是喜笑颜开。人生走到现在不少人觉得我负面，我自己也觉得我的心态是不符合社会对正面的定义的。我不知道的是，世界上还有很多其他人觉得所谓符合定义的正面心态，有可能是利大于弊。而且是有一派心理学完全是符合我对我心态的理解。我不是负面，我只是很理智的去看问题。而我面对问题的心态，就是设想最差的情况，然后做出即使这种事情发生了，也不会怎么样的决定。就像有人担心嫁不出去。然后各种询问别人自己有没有希望。一般人就会鼓励她说，没关系啊，你一定会找到命中注定的那个人的。每次看到这种话，我就觉得，你怎么知道呢。这个世界上一辈子单身的人也不少见。有时候你越是害怕孤独越是可能把自己推进一个比孤独更可怕的场景里面。对我来说，与其去相信未来更好，不如去相信即使未来不会更好，也不会差到你完全不能承受。

一如孤独，如果你这辈子从来没孤独过，那么估计想象自己会孤独一生是很可怕的事情，如果你这辈子从现在开始一直是一个人，要不了多久就会习惯甚至享受这种生活，不管别人怎么看，你的人生未必痛苦。也许不是最好的，但是也不是最差的。对于物质条件的追求也是一样，抑郁症在发达国家发生率反而是最高的，就是因为发达国家过于宣传追求快乐幸福的重要性，让人把一些非必要的东西上升为得到快乐必须的，而这种疯狂的追求快乐本身就会是抑郁的源头。如果对于快乐的定义就是有一个平静和平和的心态，很多东西的存在其实是没有必要的，只会给人徒增烦恼。

我有时候深刻的感觉到一味让人往正面的方向想，反而会成为一种压力。就像自信一样。很少有人能够毫无理由的自信，如果做的大部分事情都失败，努力了还挂科，用尽力气也没法让自己喜欢的人同样重视自己，这个人要自信很难。光是自我催眠我是最棒的并不能适用于任何人。承认自己是一个凡人，承认自己会失败，承认自己的人生恐怕会比少数幸运儿走得艰难，然后不以为意才是最好的心态吧。有时候我觉得我妈之所以每天过的那么开心就有点这个意思在里面。她的人生虽然算不上是充满艰难，但是也不能算是完全顺利。但是她的心态仿佛不会以缓解的好坏为转移。输了钱，工作上跟人有纷争，离婚，她好像都比一般人更加看得开。也不会强求什么。中国的家长少有女儿过了一定年龄不结婚的，她也从来没催过。甚至我在问她如果我这一辈子都不结婚会怎样这种问题的时候，她也是说，其实这也没啥，你一个人也能过得开心。对她来说仿佛没什么是人生一定要有的。一切顺其自然。我小时候觉得她有时候挺没有责任感的，没什么目标，生活也没什么压力，渐渐长大以后我突然觉得也许这样的心态才是最好的也说不定。毕竟就像书里和很多人说过的一样，其实我们的主观意愿和努力，改变不了世界太多东西，即使乔布斯这种改变了世界的人，也改变不了自己英年早逝的事实。他说过一句很有名的话，大意就是面对死亡的好处，就是在死亡面前，一切不重要的东西都被剥去，留下来的是最重要的。什么是对一个人最重要的，我想应该是自己的心灵，而不是外在的东西，因为你脑子里面想的，身体所感受的，才是唯一重要的东西。不求改变这个世界，只求不被这个世界改变。维持本心。

The art of happiness – 读后感

达赖喇嘛在国内应该是个敏感词了。其实我在国内长大期间，虽然作为离西藏最近的省份之一，我自己从来没有去过西藏，只是在生活中知道一些藏民的学生。也不太清楚西藏的宗教和中国政府统治的各种矛盾。就那么长大了。不过这也是很正常的，我就连学潮在我上大学以前都没有怎么听说过，记得大一的时候宿舍某个女生跟我说她入党的时候还说了89年自己年纪还小，所以跟学潮没有关系之类的。在那个时候我还没有什么深刻的认识。等到我大四的时候出去实习，在浦东图书馆办了一个借书证拼命看书开始，才第一次认识了文化大革命，在到了美国之后，才开始认识到学潮，到中国要办奥运会的时候才认识了西藏的问题。我觉得作为在中国非少数民族地区长大的人来说，要在西藏这个问题上保持一个中立的立场是很难的。当初奥运的时候被动的了解了一些知识，我个人也是认为中国政府在这件事情上肯定有错，但是错得不是很严重。毕竟西藏这个地方的经济发展人民的生活，在“入侵”之后是高于“入侵”之前的。但是当我这个从小就被培养成无神论的人开始逐渐了解信仰的作用的时候，我突然开始疑惑，物质生活的改善能不能弥补当时虔诚的信徒心理上的冲击呢。毕竟达赖喇嘛对他们来说可以说是神一样的存在。这本达赖喇嘛和一个心理学家合写的书，其实没有提到多少政治的问题，主要还是以西方学者提问题，达赖回答的形式来写的，关于人怎么克服自己负面的心理和感情，追求快乐的书。但是里面还是不免提到了一些关于中国对西藏某些人的压迫。里面提到一个故事让我印象很深刻，说中国派出去的教师，为了摧毁所谓佛教不杀生的信仰，要求学生第二天带来自己亲手杀死的动物，给予计分，动物越大分数越多。从感情上我是很难接受这种行为的，也怀疑过这个故事是编的，主要是在我的印象里面，藏族人没有不杀生的习惯把。他们不怎么吃素菜，都吃肉，还能不杀生？如果他们不杀生，什么考了半熟的羊肉是怎么来的。不过也可能故事的主题是指那些已经出家的孩子。无论是真是假，我没有办法去证实。只是当我扪心自问这种事有没有可能发生，我发现我迟疑了。因为我的内心告诉我自己，一个能让文化大革命，一堆人围着把自己的老师打得半残疾甚至打死的国家，这种事情的发生也不是那么难以理解。但是我相信这种事情（范指残忍的事情）中国不是唯一一个，不是第一个也不是最后一个。所以我的纠结心情部分来自西方记者那种自命清高的情绪。就像你们美国人或者祖先欧洲人没有接着宗教或者其他原因迫害别人的时候。另外里面也讲到一些喇嘛被关起来几十年，受折磨，最后出狱了，说他的狱中最害怕的事情不是受折磨，而是失去对Chinese的compassion. 看到书里达赖喇嘛说的话和理论，我基本上能理解为什么之前的美国人会这么看重他，相信中国是入侵了一个叫做西藏的国家，而不是只是控制和管理了本来就是属于中国政府的一部分。我能理解为什么她相信达赖是本着去解救自己的国民，把错误的事情扭转正确，而不是去分裂本来好好的一个国家的。因为他学佛的态度和追求。如果我不是在中国长大，也许我也会像她那么想。有时候看书是一个很危险的动作，就像去了解别人一样，有时候这种了解，会动摇你本来的想法。让你感到困惑和迷茫，不知道什么才是对的。可能这件事本身就代表了一个问题，世界上大多数事情都不是非黑即白的，你能坚定的占在一个极端，而不是中庸的立场上，并不是因为你的立场或者你的个性有多么坚定，而是因为你选择不去理解那些站在你对立面的人的感情，背景，和他们为什么这么想。当你去理解了以后，再坚定的人也会动摇。因为这个世界很少有人是完全正确的，相对的也很少有人是完全错误的。

说了半天也没有说到这本书本身如何。我在goodreads上给了这本书三星的评价。也许真实的评价应该是在三星和四星之间徘徊。里面大部分废话都是那个心理学家说的，比如给达赖喇嘛的理论找现代心理学的依据。达赖自己说的话很多我反而还是很能找到启发的。里面有一个很发人深省的问题，就是愤怒，悲观，痛苦等负面情绪，到底是不是人性的一部分。因为如果你相信这些负面的东西是人性的一部分，那么追求完全消灭负面情绪就成了一个不可完成的任务，如果你相信个人的情绪是后来产生的，那么消灭它回归本心就是有可能的。但是这个问题目前来看是无解的，除非可以找到一个完全没有负面感情的人，但是就连达赖喇嘛本人也没有否认自己有负面情绪。里面提到了在西方心理学上一个重要的问题，叫做self-loathing 或者自我仇恨，觉得自己很烂，不值得爱。达赖喇嘛第一次听到这个理论的时候，第一反应是不能理解。因为在他的世界观和人生观里面所有的人都是爱自己的，佛教的理论就是让教徒不要那么关注自己，而开始去关注他人，关注别人的痛苦。不仅是他自己估计在整个西藏的文化中也没有自我厌恶这种情绪。他的观点被表达为 of course, we love ourselves. 这让西方心理学家感到有点震惊。震惊的点在于，竟然在一个文化中自我厌恶的情绪是不存在的。那么这种情绪就是后天的conditioning而不是先天就是人性的一部分。他尝试去定义love，为真诚的希望对方能快乐，不管对方是怎么对自己的。从这个定义上来看，确实每个人都是爱自己的，希望自己能快乐的，就算那种会自虐或者自杀的人，也是为了解脱痛苦，而不是想让自己更痛苦。这个跟我对一些心理学家的看法一致，就是他们很喜欢制造出来一些概念，让人觉得自己有病。但是根源也许并不是这样。就像一个喜欢自我折磨的人，如果你告诉他世界上有一种心态叫做自我厌恶，他就等于找到了一个解释自己行为的答案，这种答案并不能帮组他停止自虐的行为。如果你告诉他他自虐不是因为自我厌恶，而是缺少让自己解脱痛苦的手段，那么人的行为至少会往正面的地方去走。

书里面另外一个观点就是消除负面不一定就是针对负面情绪，或者负面情绪产生的原因，而是培养出更多的正面情绪去作为antidote. 我觉得这还是有一定的道理的，越是在痛苦和压力之下，你越需要更多的正能量。如果一个人可以用一些办法一直加强对这个世界和别人的正面情绪的话，即使有负面情绪产生也能与之对抗。就像一个人对别人所做的事情，也是被一个人对这个人的看法所影响的。就像怀疑自己邻居偷了自己东西的人，不管邻居做什么他都觉得可疑，等他找到自己的东西的时候，突然邻居做的事情又正常了。如果按照这样的逻辑，如果一个人对周围的任何事情都能抱着最大的善意，是不是就能避免积累负面情绪了呢。用我在看的另外一本书的理论来说，当你遇到一个烦心的人或者烦心的事情的时候，你问问自己，是这个人让你不开心了，还是你对这个人的judgement让你不开心？

Pleasure vs. Happiness

因为买了太多书，所以现在我也开始养成了如果一本书看了三章还是没让我产生兴趣，就放弃不看免得浪费时间的习惯。这样做的结果就是在我的kindle上产生了一个cannot finish的分类。昨天晚上开始看达赖喇嘛和一个心理学家合写的书，the art of happiness. 里面提到了人的本能是追求pleasure，但是人生的目的是追求happiness.两个概念是有本质的区别，但是经常被人混淆起来使用。如果翻译成中文的话，应该是快感享受和快乐幸福的差别。比如吸毒，买昂贵的奢侈品都会给人带来pleasure但是不会给人持久的幸福。佛教里面说的一件事情是正面和负面，并不是由你做了这件事给你带来当下的感受而决定的，而是这件事给你和周围的人带来的后果决定的。如果一件事情你做了，长久来看的结果是正面的，这件事就是好事，否则就是坏事。所以有很多给人带来短暂快感的活动都不是什么正面的事情，时间长了就会带来伤害。

看到这里我就在想有没有什么事情是给你给你当下带来快乐，长远来看也是好的呢。然后我发现这样的事情很多，比如锻炼身体，比如对别人表示善意，比如学习。最近一直在prelim的事情上反复纠结，自我怀疑，虽然老板还是挺满意的，但是我自己却一直看不到什么特别大的进步，project的进展也是一片迷雾。所以从上周三到今天我也没有在project花太多时间。但是作为一个研究生什么都不做是一种罪恶，所以我把时间都花在学习新的东西上。比如python.一种比较简单的编程语言。我在codeacademy上把关于python的课程都学了，练习都做了。因为学习就是一个跟遗忘做斗争的过程，我在另外一个online学习的网站，https://www.coursera.org/ 注册了一些跟我科研有关系的课，主要是统计，然后上完一门又一门这样来保持自己对知识的熟悉度。昨天晚上正好第三周的内容被发布了出来，里面的作业有很多计算的部分，我实在是懒得拿出来草稿纸，因为对我来说手算数据已经没啥意义了，毕竟我不需要参加纸笔考试， 我只要能在电脑的帮组下算出来就行。里面要求log transform数据，数据的给出方式是数据用逗号的方式隔开，于是我就贴到python里面自己编了一个3,4行的程序，把结果算出来。然后把新的数据贴到统计软件R里面把需要的统计结果计算出来。当时我就感觉到一种非常开心的感觉，一种自己学习一个新东西哪怕只有一周也没有白费的感觉。而且学习这种行为长期来看对人也只有好处没有坏处。我一直觉得自己是一个爱学习的人，但是因为懒惰，有时候宁愿把时间浪费在几乎不能给我带来任何及时的快乐，也不能给我带来长期的幸福的事情上，比如在网上乱逛，比如看一些很无聊的肥皂剧，纠结一些无聊的小心事。那本书里说得好，当你要对自己的人生做什么决定的时候，可以问自己一个很简单的问题，will it bring me happiness? 如果不能，就要考虑把时间花在这样的事情上是否有意义了。