Charles Bufe

AA was too much of a religion for him to be able to use it to stop drinking.

I will admit some AA members can be a bit over-bearing on the religion, but my home group has a number of Ultra-Orthodox Jews. 'Jesus will save you" doesn't go over well.

Using religion as a reason to not go to meetings means Bufe didn't want to stop drinking.

Yes there is religion, if you want it, but as my sponsor pointed out, god also stands for 'Group Of Drunks'.

Much time is spent examining the Oxford Group, show more which both Bill W and Dr. Bob belonged to, but AA is not a subset of the Oxford Group, any more than the Oxford group is a subset of the Lutherans, or the Lutherans a subset of the Roman Catholics.

Yes there are AA Nazis, only alcohol is to be discussed, but there are just as many groups and members that worry about drugs, are you hungry and do you have a warm/dry place to sleep.

The book was written in 1991, spending a significant amount of time on the Oxford Group is meaningless. They peaked before WWII, and the 1936 praise of Hitler is meaningless, a quarter of Congress praised him in 1936.

For what it is worth I wouldn't give the Big Book more than a 3, try Getting Better by Robertson. Maybe if the Big Book was edited to bring it into the 21st Century. show less

Most of this is categorized and listed KJV verses. The collection of sexuality constraints does come across as an uneven code: bestiality, homosexuality, adultery, and a woman losing virginity before marriage are all capital crimes without rape and pederasty being mentioned. Indeed, women are treated as second-class citizens as one section makes clear placing them in a subordinate role to their husbands, etc. The paired contradictions also are impactful, including Christ's remarks to return show more prior to the passing of those in his hearing. There also damning quotes from Twain, Nietzsche and others. show less

A somewhat snarky attempt to redefine words in a humorous manner. A lot of hilarity, though there are also a lot of misses.

The introduction makes it very clear that "An Understandable Guide to Music Theory is a 'user's manual' which concentrates on those aspects of theory that are of most practical use to people playing and writing music". So, it would be totally unfair to judge it from the standpoint of a beginner without prior musical experience. Having said this, I proceed with my opinion:

I can say that it's nicely organized and explanations are concise. I also appreciate the vast amount of examples provided show more right after an explanation. However, it is written methodically and descriptively, just like a textbook and it doesn't give the "friendly, relaxed vibe" some new books have with their everyday life examples and comparisons that help increase cognitive ease (make new terms and ideas easier to grasp, often comparing to things you already know, therefore decreasing mental struggle). Depending on your taste, this can be a good or bad thing.

I took my time reviewing this book because I tried learning more about the subject from different sources and I can say it suits really well as a support guide meant to be used in a classroom or as reference material when you are in doubt of something specific and need a quick and easy explanation.

Main subjects include:
Scales
Chords
Chord progressions
Melody
Form
Useful techniques (Ostinato, Pedal tone, hocket, pointillism, rhythmic variation, mirrors, doubling, etc.)
Instrumentation

*I got this book so that I could give my honest opinion about it show less