I should have learned by now to take endorsements from otherwise credible sources with a grain of salt. The best I can say about this overrated/overhyped book is that the story line was interesting and character development good, however it quickly became disjointed and, frankly, boring. The primary narrator was pretty good---in fact he should have done the entire recording, because the second narrator, assuming the role of the scribe, was just awful----to the extent that I couldn't stand to listen to it. Thankfully, it was a short book but I was still unable to stick with it to the end.
For years Grisham has managed to get away with blatant political bias that would be the kiss of death to most authors which, I assume, is because he has always been such a superb story teller----at least that's why I keep reading his books. Well, no longer. While Gray Mountain contains his typical left wing prejudice, the story offers no redeeming value. A complete bore. Very disappointing. He had a good run but, absent a stunning comeback, I'm finished with Grisham.
I am not familiar with the reader, but she did a credible job. I gave her extra credit for not trying to imitate a man's voice and also for not being guilty of any major pronunciation errors (the latter of which is all too common even with otherwise excellent readers).
Despite the interminable (and perhaps unnecessary) length of this book, I enjoyed listening to it. The author is a good story teller and the reader performed a decent rendition. I must however agree with some of the reviewers who cite bias on the part of the author. Actually, mere "bias" would be a considerable understatement. I have never been a fan of Nixon or Reagan but was nonetheless taken aback by the palpable bias of the author toward both----and especially Reagan.
This is where the reader did a creditable job---you could actually hear the author frothing with contempt at many of Regan's initiatives. In some cases, despite the author's attempt to the contrary, the positions that Nixon and (especially) Regan were advocating came across as very persuasive. Another peculiarity I noticed, which initially surprised me, were the little shots he took at the Catholic Church; but I soon understood that his venom was directed against the traditional Catholic Church of all times and that he in fact seemed to favor some of the more outrageous manifestations of the post 1968 Vatican II church.
In summary, if you are interested in this period of history, or lived through it as I did, you will enjoy this book as I did. On the other hand, if you are offended by blatant bias and/or are big advocates of Nixon and/or Regan, you might want to stay away from it.
What I liked best was Tannenbaum continuing his use of the same characters present since the beginning of the series and his use of real current events to enliven the story. What I like least is his consistent error in his references to St. Teresa of Avila. I find her apparitions to Lucy clever and amusing, but the credibility would be enhanced if he discontinued referring to St. Teresa as a martyr. She was a virgin (V); not a virgin/martyr (VM). I also think he could have shaved off a couple of hours by cutting back on a lot of unnecessary and frankly uninteresting details on some of his sub-plots involving secondary and tertiary characters.
I would compare it with all the books in the Butch Karp/Marlene Campi series. All of the great characters are present in their typical form.
Yes, I would. He did an adequate job and also got an extra star from me for not making any blatant mispronunciations which are (regrettably) typical of so many readers---even some of the better ones. Nothing against Mr. Walter, but authors should stick with the same readers when they are writing books that are part of a series. People get used to particular voices and associate them with the respective characters.
It doesn't "need" one but I'm sure it will get one.
St. Thomas Aquinas, is without any doubt, the most brilliant human being who has ever lived. He completely systemized theology (as well as philosophy). He built upon and corrected such giants as St. Augustine, the great pagan philosopher Plato, and completed what was left to us by the greatest of all pagan philosophers, Aristotle.
St. Thomas Aquinas' most important body of work, the Summa Theologiae, while intimidating to modern readers, is brought to life and made readily understandable by Peter Kreeft. I cannot say enough about how impressed I am with this with this book!
My only additional comment is to encourage any reader/listener with an interest in theology, philosophy/epistemology to read or listen to this book. No prior education or training in philosophy is required to understand and appreciate it.
Not at all. The reader sounded like he was in a hurry and his pronunciation was atrocious----a problem, unfortunately all too common in audio books. Initially, I thought that the mispronunciations were limited to proper nouns (players' names), which while still inexcusable, would at least be tolerable. But alas, that was not the case.
I can't think of another book with which to compare Personal Foul, but I found it to be an honest and candid representation of the circumstances leading to the problem----i.e. no whining or constantly making excuses, blaming others etc. In fact, to my shock, I found myself empathizing with the author.
Yes, primarily with the plethora of mispronunciations.
I was moved by learning the extent----not the existence--of corruption and incompetence in the NBA management and officiating. If I continue to watch NBA games, and I still haven't decided upon that, it will certainly be with a jaundiced eye. Is pro basketball a sport, like college basketball where fouls are called on the basis of objective criteria, or a "performance," where the object is to keep high profile players on the floor "no matter what"? Clearly it's the latter, and this is evident across the board.
Great book. Couldn't put it down.
The story line was hackneyed, boring and cliched. I only decided to read this book based upon its (unbelievable) ranking on recent fiction---so, lesson learned for me.
It was so boring and, at times offensive, that I couldn't finish it. I think I probably got through a third of it. I suppose I liked parts of the female story---somewhat interesting and credible, but the male part was a loser in so many respects. I'm not sure which was more loathsome---the character or the reader.
I'm sorry I read this book and will never read another from this author.
Despite the typically brilliant performance (reading) of Scott Brick, this book was a major disapointment. I had hoped that old age would make me more discerning, but it seems to have made me more stubborn, as I stayed with this interminable tale way too long. Speaking of "long," there are way too many extraneous and irrelevant narratives in this book. Based upon some of the more positive reviews, I had hoped for something approaching The Stand---maybe too high an expectation----or Swan Song, but alas, it didn't come close.
Until now. I have to take issue with other reviewers on a couple of points. First of all, I have not observed any regression in the quality of his Swagger novels (prior to this one). Although Hunter presents a good and plausible story line, the level of meaningless detail on relatively insignificant matters almost seems like he's trying to
No, I would not, for reasons evident in my review.
Schriner does well with accents.
I, Sniper inspired me to read a summary and some reviews of the next Hunter novel before purchasing.
Report Inappropriate Content