ik pa brīdim patīk palasīt kādu bestselling šņagu, nupat izrāvu cauri the girl before (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28016509-the-girl-before), as in reāli izrāvu cauri - divos rītos pēc ieiešanas dušā, bet pirms modās festivāla biedri. smieklīga grāmata, gone girl meets greja nokrāsas, kā visnotaļ pareizi minēts recenzijās, un galveno džeku, protams, sauc edvards, bet nav nemaz tik pārlieku stulba (in a dark, dark wood by ruth ware, piemēram, atrisinājums ir saredzams no daudz lielāka attāluma), lai arī varbūt man ir bremzēta domāšana neizgulēšanās dēļ.

taču vēl smieklīgāki momenti ir recenzijās.

Secondly, both women were presented as weak-willed, indecisive, and obsessive personalities. I can’t stand when books present women as highly dependable individualities, who need a man, in order to change their lives. No. Women are strong, self-sufficient, courageous, and independent. They are responsible for their own fate. ---> a ko darīt, ja dabā sastopami visādi eksemplāri gan starp vīriešiem, gan starp sieviešiem? visiem ir jābūt varonīgajiem pionieriem? pat ne "jābūt", bet ir, pat ja nav?

The girl before, was exactly this type of book, where both women preferred to be involved in an unhealthy sexual relationship just to feel what? Alive? A bad girl? What I want to say is that they could do a load of things in order to get relieved from the unfortunate events of their past. To demonstrate, they could be involved in voluntary organization to help the women with the same problems. There was an attempt to present one of the main characters in those patterns but I didn’t find it adequate. Identically, they could travel, meet people, learn to play piano, help the planet to become more sustainable. ---> nē, es arī saku, ka labāk būtu algebru mācījušās, nekā pisušās, bet smieklīgi tomēr