It’s been a mad month for me. And I mean mad in the “I’m a lunatic” kinda way. I don’t know what it is, but I just can’t stop letting stuff get to me. Wee stupid things get me wound up to the point I want to bang my head against a wall. Need to keep telling myself to calm the hell down and stop being a girl.
I’ve also been a bit of an arse when it comes to the bevy. Something has changed. My theory is that it’s to do with FOOD. I seem to forget to eat after a few pints. I need to get my stomach full before going out and, if the session is likely to last more than, say, four hours, then I bloodly-well better have a Gregg’s or something in-between too. (DISCLAIMER: I’m not daft enough not to realise that it might be too much drink!)
Perfect opportunity to try this theory is this weekend where I’ll be hitting Edinburgh with the boys to celebrate the arrival of my mates boy Maxwell. Congrats Andy!!
Payback Yo! So in-between my panic attacks and drunkeness I’ve been slowly crawling through the next one in my project. The full title is actually Payback: Debt as Metaphor and the Shadow Side of Wealth. Going into this I thought I was in for an economics lesson; learning how banks work, how debt is managed etc. But I should have paid more attention to the sub-title. This book is actually nothing like that. It’s about debt as a psychological principal. Let me try to explain that a bit better:
If you are in debt then you owe someone something; therefore you believe that the person you owe something gave you it in return for something else of equal value. It’s all about Balance. You have to be in dept because you recognise that what you received is a fair trade for what you will owe. What do you say to a bank teller when you want to know how much is in your account? “Can you tell me my BALANCE please?” You know the symbol used in many banks? A two pan balance? This book is about fairness, not just in monetary terms but also from a moral standpoint.
Margaret Atwood goes into great detail on the subject. From debt to your god, original sin (Btw did you know that in the original bibles the actual word used in place of Sin translated to DEBT) to the different types of debt used as a plot device in literature. Such as The Christmas Carol as plot driven by monetary debt and The Godfather as moral debt.
I really enjoyed Atwood’s tone. I found her quite funny at times which was surprising. Sadly though this book was let down by drawing out a topic that could have been adequately summarised for me in a few pages. It’s not that Atwood didn’t find ways to keep it interesting, its just that it isn’t a topic I would find myself wanting to read about in my spare time.
I think I would give her another go; I think that a fiction book by her would be awesome. Sadly, overall, this book didn’t interest me enough to warrant a high rating. Sorry Margaret.
Rating: 
I’m near the end folks. Four more to go. The next one in the list (number four of the Times top 100 books of the decade) is indicated as Masterworks of the Classical Haida Mythtellers trans Robert Bringhurst (2002). But I’ve realised that this is actually several different books. Bit of a bummer. So what I’m thinking of doing is either reading one of the books or reading number 21 in the top 200. Need to make up my mind. I’m sure that Kindle availability will have a big say in my decision. Opinions on the matter in the comments if you please.
