(I listened to the audiobook, and some of the comments here are relevant only to that format.)

I enjoyed it. The writing was smooth, the stories were well-chosen, and I appreciated the author's view of valuing the middle of the narcissism spectrum instead of either of the poles. I also found his critiques of the NPI interesting and well-considered. I felt I learned a lot that was not sensationalized or overly dramatic. (Clearly there is lots of potential for the dramatic in any interaction with a narcissist, but my personal feeling is that this territory has been well-covered, possibly excessively covered, and that a consideration of the territory between the extremes has a lot of value to offer.) I can certainly say from personal experience that the descriptions of the 9s and 10s were bang-on; but I appreciated more attention and description being given to those who are higher than average in narcissism but not necessarily at that destructive extreme. In part because there's more of them, but also because if your formative experiences are with the 9s and 10s, then anything below a 9 looks like Mother Theresa (who if reports are correct is actually pretty narcissistic) or Gandhi (ditto) and you end up plunging into connections with people who are still pretty unhealthy.

However, I thought the book on the whole was not well-balanced: while stating frequently that we should all strive to be a 5 (or thereabouts) on the ten-point narcissistic continuum, most of the advice was about how to manage those who are 7 or above, whether that person is oneself, a partner, a family member, or a colleague. There was very little advice for those who are a 3 or below, except to say that they/we deserve to feel special sometimes too. The advice that was targeted to those low in narcissism (what he calls "echoists" after the myth of Echo) was in context of their relationships to narcissists rather than learning to value themselves more highly on their own account or for their own sake. This was disappointing, as it was the entire point of listening to the book for me.

As I know, through reading and through discussions with others who have come from families like mine, when one ends up at 0 on the narcissism scale from having been repeatedly punished for having feelings or needs at all, one can find oneself repeatedly in relationships of various kinds with narcissists (for reasons discussed in the book); and then, having learned that one's radar is fritzed more or less permanently, one can learn to avoid relationships as being the only reliable way of protecting oneself from narcissists. Or, basically, and less awkwardly phrased: I have a hard time letting people into my life enough to become disappointed by them, Dr. Malkin, precisely because I was so thoroughly taught to disregard my needs and feelings that the thought of bringing them up in any context with anyone ever itself prevents the very kinds of relationships in which expectations and disappointments might occur. My opportunities to put into practice the ideas you discuss are very, very few. But besides that: is the only reason I or other echoists have to learn to value ourselves a little more is to function better in the context of relationships with potential narcissists? That seems a bit bleak.

I've noticed that the author in other reviews has frequently come to discuss critical points raised, so here's hoping that Malkin pops up to tell me what I might have overlooked or where else I might find this.

...it strikes me, after reading this over, that I am basically more comfortable having expectations of books than I am in having expectations of the people in my life. Hrm.

Also: audiobook publishers! Please include chapter titles in the audiobook tables of contents! It is very hard to navigate an audiobook with chapters labelled simply "chapter 1" and "chapter 2" and so on, without any descriptive label of the contents, and this is particularly annoying when there are descriptive labels in the print version. I found myself googling the table of contents online so I could figure out where to go to find particular subjects or topics. ( )

I discovered Craig Malkin’s work in Psychology Today. On subscribing to the magazine, I couldn’t help but think political science might have done the same thing. Psychology Today is a model for other disciplines of how to get their research out into the broader community in an easily digestible way. That’s not to say that I enjoy reading research results that are all presented as lists, i.e., “if you have these five characteristics you are an arsehole” – this becomes rather dull at times – but it does enable me to apply tools and learn about concepts in psychology that I would otherwise not have the training to comprehend appropriately. Rethinking Narcissism is useful for self-analysis and for coping with others. The Narcissism Test was useful. I recall the first time I encountered the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) test in 1992, during a semester of “Character-Building”, a third-class module at the Royal Military College, Duntroon. I scored an extreme ENTJ (extraversion-intuition-thinking-judgment) – “The Commander”. I undertook the test again in 2001 and found I was slightly less extreme, less again in 2007, and since 2014 I occasionally score as an INTJ (introversion), but the NTJ types are still quite strong. Over time I have learnt to relax, to hold my tongue (when I am not ramming it down my throat), and to be patient, less aggressive, and less competitive. So, when I scored 7 on the narcissism spectrum (this is not too good – a five is ideal), I was not surprised but it made sense that from my teens until my forties I was easily in the extremely unhealthy narcissist range. Malkin’s idea of narcissism as a spectrum was quite useful. When I left the military, I recall saying to my former CO, then a colonel, that I was sick of everything being so ego-driven (so said the young man who had been top of his cohort since Duntroon until leaving the Regular Army, a complete “thruster” if ever there was one and all at the expense of everyone around him). But the good colonel said to me that there was a bit of ego in everything, and it could be good. But off I went to join the Salvation Army, thinking it was circumstantial rather than me that was the issue (as you do). There have been several others who have recognised my philosophical struggles over the years and their insights were enlightening. Likewise, Malkin speaks to me in a way that makes it OK to be a narcissist sometimes, but to find a healthy balance in doing so. On reading Malkin’s work, I can see I have much work to do. But now I also have a few tools to deal with the narcissists who surround me. Reading this work was similar to reading BIFF. One feels awkward reading about a scale of something rather than the binary “you suck – you’re awesome!” nonsense that drives most things in contemporary society. But it Malkin echoes the words of the good colonel and for that alone it was worth the read. As for Goodreads’ rating system, I find it difficult to give such books a high score. Were they useful? Yes. Will I use the concepts? Yes. Does this strike me like Thomas Mann’s Death in Venice or Hemingway’s Moveable Feast? Not really. So while my rating of this and other books is low, it is only in the company of the great literature I am reading. A separate ratings category for classics versus self-help books might be useful; regrettably, until such time I must rate books in the company they keep. But don’t let that stop you from reading this favourite from Oprah’s Book Club! ( )