Schopenhauer Cure
---Yalom's writing in general annoys me, as well as the sensibility of protagonist therapist, esp at beginning. -plot-points strike me as ill-designed, perhaps sloppy~ neglect to address distracting qstns (a few edits wld resolve the most bothersome): eg -didn't death 'enter the stage' when wife killed in car crash 10 yrs before? (give at lst a few words about how it is different still when Julius sees his own death as imminent - wife dying did not convey that?) -Julius says there is no psychoanalytic literature on dying? come on. -Julius saw Philip for 3 yrs terminating 22 yrs ago. math: starting 25 yrs ago. in a 30 yr career. so he was only 5 yrs in when took Philip as a patient- but no mention of his relative youth/inexperience/any change or maturation of his clinical style? (cld have just made it a bit more recent, say terminated 10 yrs ago) -likewise, Rebecca describes an event from 15 yrs ago and Julius says yes he remembers bc she was in indiv therapy w/ thim at the time, 'several years ago' (several=15? jarring to me) -and may be a distinct inconsistency that Pam says her encounter w/ Philip was 'more than 20 yrs ago' - and then the group refers to the intervening '15 years'. The point of my nitpicking~ is that I was jarred / distracted by these and it seems of a piece with what I don't like in Yalom's writing ~ lack of carefullness~artistry.
However:
+ the story is engaging me. enjoying reading it, past p.20 after a few hours. (-been skipping the Schopenhauer bio sections, but might go back -also 2 sxns of Pam in India sxns)
+ quotations from Schopenhauer epigraphing each chapter are good
and, especially + the 'real-time' group therapy is engaging and here the writing no longer seems dumb. disagree w/ az revwrs who find the chars of group members undeveloped. I experience an interesting set of believable personalities.
and this is the most of the novel, once past beginning, so.
maybe I wldn't dislike irvin yalom~?