Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

One of the harder books I've reviewed here and is one of the few cases where I wish GR had half stars. I feel wildly torn on "Going Clear" for two simple reasons. For starters, the book is a narrative mess. It is not told in a linear, or sometimes, even understandable, order. The book jumps around wildly throwing out names of people who, until that point had not been heard of, only to elaborate on them further down the line. A story of a Scientologist "blowing" was inexplicably broken up by a breakdown of the meal preferences and day-to-day schedule of the Church's current leader, David Miscavige. The book reads almost like a checklist rather than a fluid narrative, checking off topics surrounding Scientology rather than actually telling it in a typically linear fashion.

But... and this is a big but, it actually kind of gave me something to think on. It challenged how I viewed Scientology and questioned why it is the scapegoat of constant religious persecution when others are not. I am not a Scientology hater like most of the internet is, but I do not support it either. Like Wright alludes to, I view them the same as any Mormon or Amish community. I have a sudden... what's the word? Not appreciation, because that sounds like I appreciate the movement. Maybe a changed opinion? I suddenly don't see Scientology as a complete whack-o group. It's full of misgivings, maybe even crime. And is full to the brim of narcissists. But if the "religion" works for them, why shouldn't they have the ability to practice it freely? What religion doesn't have its own set of strange, nearly incomprehensible factors of belief? Is it because it is easily disproven? If that's so, isn't every religion easily disproven? Isn't that why it's called faith?

I feel so entirely different about the concept of Scientology than when I started this book. I just wish the narrative had flowed better and that the actual storytelling was more succinct. There's an incredible book here, but it just has to be found.