hasseltkoffie's review against another edition
2.0
"Para mi solo recorrer los caminos que tienen corazon, cualquier camino que tenga corazon. Por ahi yo recorro, y la unica prueba que vale es altravesar todo su largo. Y por ahi yo recorro mirando, mirando, sin aliento."
Worst Apprentice Ever.
Worst Apprentice Ever.
chairmanbernanke's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting stories of spiritual discovery and experience of nature. The author provides some analysis and structure for the happenings.
sbenzell's review against another edition
2.0
Honestly knowing that "Dr." Castaneda made all this stuff up mostly ruins the book for me. There is some beautiful imagery in the rituals and dreams. But none of this is authentic, so I can't get excited about doing any sort of hermeneutics on it.
I can't wait to find an authentic version of this book.
PS my friend's dad from Sanora claims to speak Yaqui so that's cool.
I can't wait to find an authentic version of this book.
PS my friend's dad from Sanora claims to speak Yaqui so that's cool.
squeakynib's review against another edition
3.0
My favorite quote from the book: Your decision to keep on the path or to leave it must be free of fear or ambition. I warn you. Look at every path closely and deliberately.
komilo's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
brannigan's review against another edition
3.0
Nobody likes listening to other peoples' dreams. What may seem vividly fascinating to the dreamer is, without fail, shitlessly boring to everyone else. Likewise, I hate dream sequences and narcotic trip accounts in my literature. To me, cryptic dream scenes are most often just lazy filler, hardly ever advance the plot, and surely an only ever appeal to your dickhead mate that you had when you were fourteen who had just discovered Kerouac and keeps half a bottle of SoCo under his bed.
So you can understand my initial aversion to this book, which on first appearances seems to be some sort of weird stoner-journal. But my mate read it and loved it and insisted I read it and love it too and kindly gifted me a copy.
I was pretty impressed with the quality of the writing, to be honest - yes, much of the content is made up either of first-person accounts of crazy trips, but Carlos' writing has this academic clarity that keeps these recounts fresh. This is carried over in his reconstructed dialogue with don Juan, which always seems to follow a calm Socratic question-and-answer structure quickly becomes hypnotic in itself.
But for all the trips and hallucinogen-hunting, the main point of this book is a meeting of worlds. This is a clash of civilisations in microcosm - Carlos' rational, curious and thoroughly Westernised worldview coming into (often frustating) contact with don Juan's world of Yaqui sorcery, with its own distinct metaphysics and internal logic.
But then, we come to the prickly issue of the book's veracity. I have subsequently read that it's probably that Castaneda made the whole thing up. To be fair, it doesn't read like any Master's thesis I've ever come across before. This bothered me at first, but on reflection, I realise it's pretty irrelevant. Look at it from a meta perspective: this is a book in which the main protagonist sets out on a journey of new knowledge that forces him to question the very meaning of truth itself. The reader goes through the same experience, with the book as a vector for new truths. So whether it is read as allegory, fiction, non-fiction, straight-up anthropological account - the message remains the same.
Bit weird, maybe a bit pretentious, but opens the eyes a few degrees wider. Three thumbs up.
So you can understand my initial aversion to this book, which on first appearances seems to be some sort of weird stoner-journal. But my mate read it and loved it and insisted I read it and love it too and kindly gifted me a copy.
I was pretty impressed with the quality of the writing, to be honest - yes, much of the content is made up either of first-person accounts of crazy trips, but Carlos' writing has this academic clarity that keeps these recounts fresh. This is carried over in his reconstructed dialogue with don Juan, which always seems to follow a calm Socratic question-and-answer structure quickly becomes hypnotic in itself.
But for all the trips and hallucinogen-hunting, the main point of this book is a meeting of worlds. This is a clash of civilisations in microcosm - Carlos' rational, curious and thoroughly Westernised worldview coming into (often frustating) contact with don Juan's world of Yaqui sorcery, with its own distinct metaphysics and internal logic.
But then, we come to the prickly issue of the book's veracity. I have subsequently read that it's probably that Castaneda made the whole thing up. To be fair, it doesn't read like any Master's thesis I've ever come across before. This bothered me at first, but on reflection, I realise it's pretty irrelevant. Look at it from a meta perspective: this is a book in which the main protagonist sets out on a journey of new knowledge that forces him to question the very meaning of truth itself. The reader goes through the same experience, with the book as a vector for new truths. So whether it is read as allegory, fiction, non-fiction, straight-up anthropological account - the message remains the same.
Bit weird, maybe a bit pretentious, but opens the eyes a few degrees wider. Three thumbs up.
lookhome's review against another edition
4.0
"A man of knowledge is one who has followed truthfully the hardships of learning... A man who has, without rushing or without faltering, gone as far as he can in unravelling the secrets of power and knowledge"
I'll admit I didn't finish Castaneda's Structural analysis. While interesting it seemed to take away from the overall quality of awe and wonder that permeates the entirety of the novel.
Strongly recommended for anyone interested in altered states of seeing and/or being.
I read the Prophet a little while before reading this and I have to admit I found it hard not to draw comparisons. Be it in the "teachings" or the mentor/student mentality of both texts, the novels could easily be used in a comparative essay.
That being said, I found this better in every way. The writing, the lessons, the overall less preachy tone of novel, Castaneda's Don Juan expresses clearly and in great detail the entire but still incomplete process of becoming a Man of Knowledge.
If anything, remember The 4 Natural Enemies, Fear. Clarity. Power. Old Age and you'll do fine.
I'll admit I didn't finish Castaneda's Structural analysis. While interesting it seemed to take away from the overall quality of awe and wonder that permeates the entirety of the novel.
Strongly recommended for anyone interested in altered states of seeing and/or being.
I read the Prophet a little while before reading this and I have to admit I found it hard not to draw comparisons. Be it in the "teachings" or the mentor/student mentality of both texts, the novels could easily be used in a comparative essay.
That being said, I found this better in every way. The writing, the lessons, the overall less preachy tone of novel, Castaneda's Don Juan expresses clearly and in great detail the entire but still incomplete process of becoming a Man of Knowledge.
If anything, remember The 4 Natural Enemies, Fear. Clarity. Power. Old Age and you'll do fine.
thorpedo's review against another edition
4.0
La segunda parte es un poco sesuda, pero es un muy buen libro