I bought this because I like cats and I'm interested in zen teachings, so when I spotted it on the shelf in the bookshop it seemed like a good find. It's a gentle book and it is clear that writing it was a meaningful personal project for the author. I think it would have made for decent content on an informal blog. However, overall I wouldn't really recommend it.
Things are a bit disjointed throughout the book. The A to Z structure doesn't work particularly well, as ideas that are conceptually adjacent end up being chapters apart, and so the book keeps repeating different iterations of the same vague conclusion and circling back to old topics. With regard to individual ideas, it is not always clear how conclusions relate to the content of sentences that preceded them.
Most of the allusions to cats are contrived and often irrelevant - there were some interesting pieces of cat-related information, but once the observation has been established that cats live in the moment more than humans do, there's really not much else to say on cats.
There is not much authority in the author's voice. Several times, something that seems interesting and relevant is mentioned but then swiftly dropped without any further details. I think the author lacks confidence in her ability to do justice to other people's ideas or to explain scientific findings, and so she uses the book to signpost these things to the reader instead of actually explaining them. The book therefore doesn't really fulfil its purpose. Most ideas the author offers are things that any reader interested in zen will already have considered. Together, these things meant it didn't really feel like I was learning anything as I read.
Sources are not particularly reliable. Sometimes a scientific study is mentioned in the text but the listed source is a third-party article about the study instead of the study itself. Wikipedia is referenced multiple times (in secondary school and university this is a big no-no). Sources largely consist of webpages the author has presumably found on Google and friends she has chatted to. I think that a dedicated, structured research process might have had the potential to lead to some good analysis and original insights on the part of the author, but instead, any references to sources seem like attempts to bulk up the book around the author's existing ideas, which are not particularly original.
The above points aren't dealbreakers, but the reason I felt compelled to write a review is that to be honest, I really, really struggled to get through the book, and this is because I was distracted by how poorly written it is. I'm astonished that it made its way past a professional editor. The pages are rife with bad grammar, awkward sentence structure, and misuse of words. There is also a lot of repetition of buzzwords ("transformative" "powerful" "deeply" etc). In some places, there are blatant direct copy-pastes from the introductory sentence of a Wikipedia article. The author has made sure each sentence is as long as it can possibly be, usually by making tautologies. Presumably this is for fear of sounding blunt, but it makes for quite a chaotic read and I think the book would be about two thirds of its length or less if it was written more concisely. The book could have been an easy, gentle read, but instead I found myself constantly pausing to figure out what the last clause I'd read was actually adding to the text, and finding more often than not that the words were just acting as padding or rephrasing something that had already been said.