The conceit (all meanings applied) of this book offends me in something like three different ways, but I'm not really awake right now. I trust your judgement, and I'll steer clear.
This book made me really angry. It was poorly written, arrogant and offensive. I was fuming about it for so long afterwards that I had to discuss it with N, who usually just listens to my book rants quietly until I'm done. But I read him parts of the authors note on this one, and he got angry too.
Or that there are ways to convey some of the same essential themes (about motivation, duty, right / wrong, and so on) without going back to the same story from history over and over again?
Ugh. I mean, the ripoff angle is certainly enough to keep me away, but to add arrogance on top of it...this is why I bounced hard off of certain very popular nonfiction writers in two fields (paleontology and medieval history) that I love. There's a certain attitude some authors convey in their introductions/author's notes that make me slam a book closed, and it sounds like Devita has that in abundance. Thanks for...um...warning us away?...taking one for the team?
It is an attractive jacket, but even that peeves me, because it's ripping off the Sophie Scholl imagery of the White Rose.
But me and my rabid rage at this book are going to take a backseat for a minute. There is definitely a design cred, but I don't know what it is, because the book has gone back to the library from whence it came.
Comments 11
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
...whoa.
Reply
Reply
But me and my rabid rage at this book are going to take a backseat for a minute. There is definitely a design cred, but I don't know what it is, because the book has gone back to the library from whence it came.
Reply
Leave a comment