Scan barcode
ilovegravy's review against another edition
2.0
I have no idea what made me pick up this book in the first place as I know I do not enjoy books of this kind in the slightest. Some parts were interesting, most of it was a real struggle to get through. And no one deserves a Structural Analysis at the end. That’s for sure. I started reading the book not knowing much about the Castaneda but then I decided to read around about him and I’m slightly amazed by how much time I wasted on a such irrelevant read.
atticmoth's review against another edition
1.0
There’s a certain type of guy whose interest in the study of ethnobotany stops at getting as fucked up as possible. I find this kind of boring and arrogant. Carlos Castaneda originally set out to write about the medicinal plants of Mexico, but settled on the study of three (one fungi, this book kept confusing the two): peyote, Datura, and psilocybin mushrooms under the apprenticeship of the titular Don Juan, a Yaqui elder. To be honest, most of the book just seemed like Carlos got pranked by a mentally ill old man. The sensationalist descriptions of his hallucinatory visions does more than any anti-drug campaign to make it seem exceedingly unpleasant, but on top of this, I found myself questioning what he (and by extension, the reader) even got out of it. Don Juan teaches a very masculinist philosophy, and only seems to offer gnomic esotericisms about power and being a “man of knowledge.” Not only that, his worldview is downright misogynist. Datura is said to be a female plant because “(1) it was possessive; (2) it was violent; (3) it was unpredictable; and (4) it had deleterious effects,” while Psylocibe is considered male because “(1) it was dispassionate; (2) it was gentle; (3) it was predictable; and (4) it had beneficial effects.” Talk about projection!
There is talk of the events of this book being fabricated. I don’t really care, because it honestly makes the framework of an anthropology thesis really funny — but this doesn’t mean the second section (the “structural analysis”) fun to read at all. It was in fact one of the most obnoxious and conceited books I’ve ever read and I can only imagine the weirdest Silicon Valley tech bros getting something out of reading this.
There is talk of the events of this book being fabricated. I don’t really care, because it honestly makes the framework of an anthropology thesis really funny — but this doesn’t mean the second section (the “structural analysis”) fun to read at all. It was in fact one of the most obnoxious and conceited books I’ve ever read and I can only imagine the weirdest Silicon Valley tech bros getting something out of reading this.
markcastaneda's review against another edition
4.0
i understand the debate of fiction vs non-fiction, and I certainly think all should be educated on the controversy prior to reading this book, but also, does it really matter? disrespect for Yaqui culture is a fair argument to make, and in this realm, yes it is. However, as far as "reality" is concerned, please dear god stop taking yourself so literally and just just enjoy the goddamn book
stefs1974's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.5
arquero's review against another edition
1.0
It's needless to reiterate here that the book is made up. Some people simply don't have respect for science or for those who do real science, sadly. What's worse is how readily it was accepted and praised by the academic community. And we're in the AI age now when such stuff can be generated en masse. It gives me goosebumps.
As for the content, outside of its academic claims, it has zero value, frankly. I hoped to find at least some common knowledge and fine writing, but it ended up being some shallow, tedious, and ambitious pseudo-science.
As for the content, outside of its academic claims, it has zero value, frankly. I hoped to find at least some common knowledge and fine writing, but it ended up being some shallow, tedious, and ambitious pseudo-science.