[solveit]

> From the importance of Lincoln's "depressive realism" to the lackluster leadership of exceedingly sane men as Neville Chamberlain

I find these comparisons deeply suspicious. If there indeed were a strong link between leadership ability and mental illness, there cannot be a very big difference between Lincoln and Chamberlain for the reason that both men were surely at the very tails of the relevant distributions. One does not become a British Prime minister by being average. I fully expect the book to be full of cherry-picked data supporting narratives built largely on popular stereotypes about successful and unsuccessful leaders of dubious accuracy.

[gustavo-fring]

You can judge the whole book based upon your beliefs or you could read it and learn.

[solveit]

There are many books, but only so many hours in the day. Conveniently there are also many HN readers who have also read the book (presumably, you included) who could tell me if I'm wrong and the book is worth reading. That being said the NYT review (https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/11/books/a-first-rate-madnes...) does not inspire confidence in me.