Posted by

I learned long ago a new blog or web name isn’t the answer.  Perhaps I should ask Keith Raniere as he is the expert at URLs.  “Literary narcissist” is one I can think of.  “Evergreen in Decline” is another.

The great writer Paul Thereaux once wrote “If you write a page a day you eventually have a novel.”  You may do the math and calculate the devotion needed; if I write more parts I will have a book on narcissism.

The latter begs the question, decline from what?

Another, the current name, is Part 5.

I never claimed to be a psychologist, or prophet, or self-help author.  Nor did  I claim to invent fake news or internet scams.  But man, real information and learning, including helping others, is harder to come by than I had thought.

“Confirmation bias” does not mean anything except to those who are confirmed biased.

Part 5 is “You are a narcissist!” is an absurd allegation.  Most of us are.  Almost all of us who are leaders, on a faster track, and are ambitious have narcissistic tendencies.

We could discuss potentially-acceptable examples.  Steve Jobs.  Elon Musk.  They are egotists and narcissists to the max.  Some people they encountered or worked with (i.e., for) admired them; most hate them.

Nonetheless, they are not criminals.

Sometimes people say “eclectic.”  Personally, I do not like the term, but it is narcissistic.

The point here in Part 5 is narcissism is normal if not a tick along-side normal.  Most people are narcissists to some degree.  Achieving people are likely narcissists and extremely driven people are very likely narcissists.

Personally, I call myself confident, even boisterous, but not unsympathetic an not un-empathetic.

The concept is difficult to understand.

Amazon link.


I wanted to like this book because of the author’s obvious scholarship. But as a practicing clinical psychologist, I find its fundamental premise completely flawed. Implicit in the book is the premise that the social critics, when they use the term narcissism, are describing the same entity as a clinician who practices psychotherapy/psychoanalysis. This is wrong, and the author would know this if she were a clinician, but she is not. The work of the social critics, which assumes a major place in the book, describes a change in values in our culture over the past couple of generations–a shift toward hedonism, consumerism and just plain selfishness. These are indisputable observations and worth writing about. However, to a clinician, narcissism is a description of a person who has a codified mental illness in the psychiatric diagnostic manual, one who stands apart from others in the culture, not because of values or lifestyle, but because of a profound disorder in interpersonal functioning that is disabling in both work and love. Lunbeck’s combining these very disparate conceptualizations of narcissism in a single volume is not only unsatisfying, but confusing. If you are a practicing therapist, this book is not for you.


That is a review on the amazon link above.  I have not read the book but I agree with that.  That is what I mean by “literary narcissist.”  It is literature and conjecture, not criminal and not clinical.