The Art of Witty Banter: Be Clever, Be Quick, Be InterestingCreate Captivating Conversation (How to be More Likable and Charismatic Book 14) by Patrick King

The Art of Witty Banter: Be Clever, Be Quick, Be InterestingCreate Captivating Conversation (How to be More Likable and Charismatic Book 14) Reviews

• 
  Jerilyn

  I feel like a better title for this book would be "How to Converse Like Your Annoying Boisterous Boomer Boss Who Thinks He's Funny But You Only Laugh Out of Fear and Awkwardness"
  
  Not a pithy or eye catching title, but far more accurate.
  
  Most of the critiques here are about how this book doesn't really cover witty banter, but that isn't the real problem. I read those critiques before checking out this book and I was not prepared for the actual problems of this book.
  
  The problem? It's bad. Really bad. Do not take this man's advice on social interactions because it is bad.
  
  Don't get me wrong, there is some good stuff here. A lot of it is well known in liguistics and psychology, he's just renamed it and pretended like he thought it up (and maybe he truly thinks that), but King makes it accessible and I get the sense that he is a genuinely personable sort.
  
  I liked the part about having a conversational resume. I thought that was good advice and if he built this book around that structure, it would have been far more interesting and helpful. I liked his tip about free association and wish he had offered more examples and exercises to strengthen that skill. I thought his tip about adding boundaries to a conversation was also good advice. He's also got a few points about making your conversation partner feel heard and comfortable that are important and could have been expanded on. I also like the part about not always taking conversations literally.
  
  However, the rest of his advice, particularly on humor and wit, is just terrible. I feel like this book, which is probably aimed at young men, could actually lead a person who truly needs help understanding the dynamics of conversation down the wrong path.
  
  At one point he suggests posing thought experiments and then proceeds to give an example about cannibalism. It wasn't funny or witty, it was weird. Sure, I've had that conversation before (with friends after a night of drinking), but if I'm having conversation with someone at a party I would be very creeped out by this line of questioning. Did he offer some good advice on how to frame a difficult question so it's more likely to be answered? Sure. Well, no. He offered Ok advice, but presenting thought experiments as some sort of mind blowing technique that will make you appear witty will just end with some innocent person getting throughly skeeved out by whatever poor soul picked up this book and took it seriously.
  
  Many parts of this book made me uncomfortable and gave me flashbacks to colllege when I exclusively dated the kind of men who self identified as Machiavellian. It felt smarmy and disingenuous. In fact, King encourages readers to lie. The book is incredibly inauthentic and I feel like if I ever met King with his Hawaiian shirts and fake stories and lame humor, I would feel uncomfortable. He doesn't know how to be himself. I hated him through parts of the book, But by the end I felt sorry for him. He has no presence, he's the class clown that doesn't realize he's grown up.
  
  I didn't know anything about the author when I checked out this book. Halfway through (I think after the cannibalism chapter) I decided to look this guy up. He was giving me Crazy Uncle vibes, so I just assumed he was a middle aged white guy who is constantly making terrible jokes because no one has the heart to tell him he's lame. I was surprised to see that I was wrong, but it did shed light on how this guy could think these techniques work. He is a pleasant looking and neat person. Pleasant looking neat people can make bad jokes and talk about cannibalism and people will laugh because people like pleasant looking neat people. His advice on an average person will not get the same mileage. I also feel like he may not consider how some of his advice might work on a livong breathing woman coming from an average looking and not so neat or respectable appearing man.
  
  It's like getting money advice from a rich person. At a certain point you have to accept that certain people are working with better resources.
  
  Some of his examples/advice came off as threatening to me, a woman. As a man, I don't think King thought about how some of his advice might come off to women, and what exactly he was telling men to do and say to female conversation partners.
  
  I'm okay with the fact that this book wasn't what I wanted. I picked It up because I wanted to know more about the inner workings of humor in conversation and I wanted tips on how to get my own natural humor to shine through. I wanted more presence in my micro interactions, and this book felt more like pick up artist tips. Whatever, that's okay.
  
  But my problem with his book is that there are a lot of people who do struggle with social interactions due to neurodivergence, circumstance, anxiety, and trauma. An accessible book breaking down the inner workings of chit chat could be really helpful for some people, but this book ain't it. The examples are lame, based entirely on the author's personal experience, and lead readers down a path to being inauthentic and inappropriate.
  
  Do not buy this book and for the love of all things good in this world do not hire this man to consult you. Unless you want goofy uncle vibes, then knock yourself out (but don't talk to me!)
• 
  Annie

  It's more about being a good conversationalist versus being witty. Still, there are some good tips like having topics and stories prepared much like you would have answers prepared for a job interview. Some suggestions include a list ("resume") of unique experiences, interesting accomplishments, interesting things that happened that week, recent fun weekends, opinions on top cultural news, and funny facts about your hometown. Another good tip is to not throw out compliments randomly. Observe what the person has spent time or considerable thought on, such as someone wearing a Hawaiian shirt instead of a T-shirt as most others have done. Compliment the person on his style. Not only would the person appreciate the acknowledgment, it will likely start an excited conversation about how he got into Hawaiian shirts and his favorite colors and patterns.
• 
  Russ

  The title is misleading. Only the final couple of chapters deal with wit. Most of the book is about preventing lulls in conversations and avoiding mistakes in chit chat.
  
  The book starts off with several acronyms that serve as guides to respond to comments that other people make. This was the weakest part of the book, because it's too hard to remember the acronyms, and even if you did, the potential responses are either predictable are nebulous.
  
  The book picks up later on. It makes the suggestion that if you're going to an important social event (conferences, parties, etc), you should plan for it the same way that you would for a job interview. Develop a "conversation resume" in advance of the event by writing down accomplishments and vignettes that you can fall back on during conversations at the event. Good idea.
  
  King makes a good point throughout the book about the purpose of conversation. The purpose isn't to grill the person you're talking to, or to prove something about yourself. The purpose is to attain mutual comfort. I like that mindset because it can probably help avoid missteps in conversations.
  
  There are some strange examples in this book that don't work. It starts off with an ode to David Letterman, but the rest of the text doesn't connect back with what Letterman did to be witty, or how you can emulate it.
  
  Overall, an uneven book with a couple of valuable nuggets spread out here and there.
  
• 
  Marek Unt

  Not witty.
• 
  Coreen Angelie

  ...
• 
  Chris Esposo

  Far from being a guide to repartee, 3/4 if this "book" reads like something out of a free pick up artist pdf guide. I've yet to find an audible book less than 4 hours that's worth what I paid for it unless it was free, and this has not broken those expectations. Yet, like a schmuck playing the markets, I keep buying these penny stocks, hoping profundity will be gotten in 2 hours or less.
  
  Although the author defined wit several times and lays out some fairly trivial ground rules of how one can demonstrate it in conversation, he failed to demonstrate to the listener that he actually possessed it for himself. Not surprisingly for a 2-hour program, very few examples. Also, I couldn't place which audience the author was targeting, business? first dates? Random chit chat? None of what he offered would be wholly appropriate for anyone's use-case, and given the brevity of his product, that was an error in structure, as it fails to provide much value to anyone less they are foreign and unfamiliar with US conversational customs, or they suffer some clinical social challenges.
  
  This is a great topic, would love the material on it, just not this one. Not recommended
• 
  Zainab

  So I picked it up because it was short and very much accessible. Few chapters in I knew it was not about the art of witty banter. Cool for me; didn't want that either. But Patrick, come on. You could have chosen a better/relevant name.
  
  Anyway, he was successful in making me actively think about the dynamics of any good or bad conversations that have made it to my permanent memory. It seems like I have the tendency to push a conversation to awkwardness, and I don't even realize it when I'm talking, especially to kids. So, to test the validity of Patrick's tips, I talked to my very young cousins about their school, 'life,' and stuff. Stuff I'm not usually interested in. It was the first time I was 'talking' to them, and it turned out pretty good. For them. I was too busy testing the tips. And now their mother wants me to teach them So, yeah.
  
  Thank you, Patrick.
• 
  Ashley von Schulman

  I’m not usually a harsh book critic, but this was just garbage. I was looking for something that talked more about the foundations of humour, but this was mostly a collection of crappy “tools” to prepare for conversations which, if used, will only compromise your presence and authenticity with your conversation partner.
• 
  Alyssa Boisson

  I thought this book would be cute and funny; a cultural observation of the behavior of some of the world’s most clever conversationalists.
  
  I couldn’t have been more wrong.
  
  This book full of cringe-worthy advice that perpetuates the echo chamber of bro-y white dudes telling cheesy jokes. I wish I could say it was interesting to see the blueprints for the conversations that construct the “old boys club.” It was not.
  
  I listened to this book during a drive on audible. Within the first quarter I could tell it was going to be tortuous. Why did I finish it? I wanted to see if the author would grant a woman a speaking role in a book about conversations. Spoiler alert: nope.
  
  EVERY example of dialogue and “wit” (including fictional references to pop culture characters as well as and scenarios invented or experienced by the author) featured only males.
  
  In over 20 conversation examples that range from David Letterman to Fresh Prince of Bel Air to some dude named Bob at work this author does not grant a woman a speaking role. That’s right: this book about dialogue doesn’t pass the Bechdel Test.
  
  Chapter 5 includes the largest amount of female presence (still no speaking roles… just a story about a man who is going to take one female colleague’s job while she’s out on maternity leave… after having an affair with his other female coworker).
  
  No part of this was funny, creative, or novel. All of it was sexist, gross, and filled with advice sure to repel anyone around you with an ounce of humor and authenticity.
• 
  P

  If you are socially awkward, this is the book for you. It's got a lot of practical tips on how to be, well, witty. If you're generally comfortable and good in conversations with people, with a decent sense of humor, you won't gain much from this book.
  
  The biggest takeaway for me was the asking for absolute answers not being the ideal approach (instead of "what's your favorite movie" ask "what are some of your favorite movies" or "what have you seen lately"). I pretty much pivot quickly to these non-absolute kinds of responses, but I should just skip the absolute ones altogether, especially with someone I don't know well.
  
  Anyway, heed the first paragraph. It will be of great use to some, but limited or no use to the rest. 3/10, but that's from my perspective -- yours may obviously be different and I would recommend this book without question if you're looking to improve on your conversational skills above and beyond a subpar level.
• 
  Liang Gang Yu

  Out of 18 pieces of advice, the best are tips for engaging in respectful (12,13,14) and personal (7, 15) conversations. Good advice for intellectual (5,8) and responsive (3, 6) dialogs. Terrible are how to be witty and teasing (11, 16).
  
  Overall, it is more about being a good conversationalist than a witty banter. Prepare yourself for it, mentally and intellectually. The book tells a few chit chat tricks that might help or backfire.
  
  Be authentic, be a conversationalist through learning knowledge and experience from practice, all of which are beyond this short book. On a positive note, to pick any homework, I would recommend “create a conversation resume”.
  
• 
  Garrett Rodgers

  Little Black Book of Wit
  
  I've been described as "charming" and "witty," but could never articulate why. This book describes, quite efficiently, several principles that earn those accolades when practiced. It's quick and enjoyable to read, so I will be recommending it to friends and colleagues.
• 
  Justin Cramer

  This is a quick read that does a good job of helping you organize what you probably already know about what makes a good conversation. From pulling a conversation from the brink of collapse to tips on when joking is, and is not, appropriate this book covers all the basics.
  
  I will most likely read this book again in a few years.
• 
  Eileen

  Although this book is limited in the art of witty banter, I thought its basic conversational advice was generally good, with the exception of perhaps the "thought experiment"--an approach to creating and asking someone's thoughts on hypothetical and generally serious scenarios--which I felt would only be appropriate and welcomed when used with those who are already close (in which case initiating engaging conversation should already hopefully not be an issue).
  
  (Sidenote: evaluated for student reading list)
• 
  Blake Edward

  I know there's some scientific linguist version of this book somewhere else, but this was a great read as an introduction to conversation theory. He deconstructs conversations and sees in the third person, viewing talkers as actors. As we converse, we're both playing characters and there are emotions and egos at play, Patrick King does a great job of explaining paths to navigate them.
• 
  Bethanie Stammen

  This book is a grab bag of things you already know and practice in conversations with others (which feels good to pin point and analyze as you read through it) and inevitably, many golden nuggets that will be extremely handy that you never thought of before. It was relatively engaging and really quick to read.
• 
  Bob

  Rating it higher than what I think it deserves, cause it made me really reevaluate things and help me clear up and organize my thoughts. It made me realize a lot about what parts of conversations I enjoy, and how to enjoy conversation
• 
  Ikechi Ukazu

  He has done better. There's a lot of fluff in his book. It can be summarized as develop different ways of saying things and just keep practicing your social skills. You can also study really witty people and dialogue
• 
  The Wandering Bibliophile

  Not witty at all. Most of the conversational ideas and examples he gives are rather unimaginative and downright lame.
• 
  Nancy

  2.5 stars. I liked that it was short. Other than that, it often read like it had been translated (badly) into English from another language, or that the author was not a native English speaker.
• 
  Sally Sharamitaro

  Finished this book Jan 9 2018