Party of One: The Loner's Manifesto

An essential defense of the people the world loves to revile--the loners--yet without whom it would be lostThe Buddha. Rene Descartes. Emily Dickinson. Greta Garbo. Bobby Fischer. J. D. Salinger: Loners, all--along with as many as 25 percent of the world's population. Loners keep to themselves, and like it that way. Yet in the press, in films, in folklore, and nearly everywhere one looks, loners are tagged as losers and psychopaths, perverts and pity cases, ogres and mad bombers, elitists and wicked witches. Too often, loners buy into those messages and strive to change, making themselves miserable in the process by hiding their true nature--and hiding from it. Loners as a group deserve to be reassessed--to claim their rightful place, show more rather than be perceived as damaged goods that need to be "fixed." In Party of One Anneli Rufus--a prize-winning, critically acclaimed writer with talent to burn--has crafted a morally urgent, historically compelling tour de force--a long-overdue argument in defense of the loner, then and now. Marshalling a polymath's easy erudition to make her case, assembling evidence from every conceivable arena of culture as well as interviews with experts and loners worldwide and her own acutely calibrated analysis, Rufus rebuts the prevailing notion that aloneness is indistinguishable from loneliness, the fallacy that all of those who are alone don't want to be, and wouldn't be, if only they knew how. show less

YES. Rufus hits the nail on the head about being a loner: we don’t hate people – we just want to be alone. We have friends. We are not “hiding” in our homes. We are not stuck up, we are not perverts, we are not socially inept. A point she brilliantly hammered home was the the headline “loners” who kill are never loners in the real sense – they are alone, not loners. They don’t want to be alone, but rather have alienated anyone who might have wanted to be around them.

If you don't feel like making small talk, and aren't interested in heading out to the latest bash or rave; if you find yourself uncomfortable in crowds, and aren't ready to put the lampshade on your head, this book is for you. A must read for every loner who has ever felt there is something wrong with them - or for every extrovert who is convinced there is something wrong with loners. The author does a wonderful job of crushing pervasive myths about the "loner", including a nice job addressing the constant portrayal of the loner as serial killer - not to mention its opposite, the serial killer as loner. Read it, then send it to all those trying desperately to get you to be their bosom buddy.

This book is an absolute godsend for anyone introverted, lonerish, or individualistic who after being constantly subjected to the "Extrovert Ideal" (as Susan Cain calls it) finally - even if only slightly - caves into the notion that there is something wrong with them. Let's face it, after being told "don't be shy", "you're so quiet", "why don't you talk to anyone", "I am worried about you", etc. an uncountable number of times, you begin to question your own sanity a little bit. This kind of badgering is the pressure of the extrovert ideal, which pushes the notion that being social equates to correct behavior, that things are only fun in the presence of others, that being alone and/or turning down invitations to gatherings means you are show more missing out on something. While these assertions may be true for nonloners and extroverts, they are false for loners and introverts. Admittedly, Susan Cain's Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking is a more diplomatic treatment of this topic, and I would definitely recommend it over "Party of One" to any extroverts/nonloners who are interested in the subject matter. On the other hand, I would recommend both books to introverts/loners, as Party of One will help you to shrug off the constant barrage of anti-loner sentiment (as well as affirm the fact that you are not crazy if you are having doubts), while Quiet will give you a well-researched overview of both of these seemingly diametric personality types. show less

Self-reliant, each loner swims alone through a social world—a world of teams, troops and groups—that scorns and misunderstands those who stand apart. Everywhere from newspapers to playgrounds, loners are accused of being crazy, cold, stuck-up, standoffish, selfish, sad, bad, secretive and lonely—and, of course, serial killers. Loners, however, know better than anyone how to entertain themselves—and how to contemplate and to create. They have a knack for imagination, concentration, inner discipline, and invention—a talent for not being bored.

Too often, loners buy into society’s messages and strive to change, making themselves miserable in the process by hiding their true nature—and hiding from it. In Party of One, Anneli show more Rufus delivers a long-overdue argument in praise of loners. Assembling evidence from diverse arenas of culture, Rufus recognizes loners as a vital force in world civilization rather than damaged goods who need to be "fixed." A compelling, morally urgent tour de force, Party of One rebuts the prevailing notion that aloneness is indistinguishable from loneliness, and that the only experiences that matter are shared ones. show less

A lot of people have rated this book 5 stars. I was disappointed that I couldn't be one of them. Party of One is written by a very unhappy woman who assumes that anyone else with introverted tendencies is also unhappy. I can't remember when I last read such a bitter, defensive book. I disliked her tone from the first page of the introduction, and it never improved. I'm still not sure why I made myself finish this one.

Even by readers who didn't love the book, Rufus is often lauded for her elegant writing. I couldn't disagree more. As I read along and realized the book wasn't going to improve, I started analyzing her writing. Looking at the way she constructed her sentences and paragraphs, I could see why I was unhappy. It wasn't just show more what she said or didn't say, it was also the way she said it. One example: In chapter 10 "Jesus, Mary, and Jennifer Lopez (Religion)", Rufus surveys loners in various world religions. When she gets to Hinduism, it takes her well into the fifth paragraph before she used the word "Hindu." Now, yes, I could figure out what she was talking about, but isn't a writer supposed to state the topic, um, like right up front? Oh, and by the way, this very long chapter had nothing to do with Jennifer Lopez. I have no idea why she was mentioned in the title.

There WAS one chapter I actually liked--chapter 12 "The L-word," which was about crime. An interesting look at how famous criminals (Mark David Chapman, the Uni-Bomber, Timothy McVae, etc and so on) were not loners at all. She theorizes how the label makes people feel safe. Definitely interesting and thought-provoking.

Recommended for: going by all the rave reviews, I think a lot of people would like this. It may be good for outgoing types who don't "get" introverts. I would think that the subject audience would have enough self-awareness to be comfortable with themselves and have no need for the book. But perhaps I just don't understand.
Edit | More show less

Anneli Rufus's Party of One is really more of a survey than a manifesto. Many different famous and not so famous loners, both in the singular and the archetypal, are presented and briefly characterized. Since I was expecting the work to be more philosophical than journalistic, I did not particularly enjoy reading this. The only thing that kept me going to the end was Anneli's style, which is delightful.