You would not be reading this review if you were not interested in the subject. So I can highly recommend the book to you. It is well written with biographical outlines of the personalities involved and the case histories that exemplify the outcomes both at the time and in retrospect. Personal views of the author are evident but do not detract from the content.
Sklar’s narration makes the book. A lesser narrator could have made the author’s lecture like presentation dry. I will look for more of his work.
The narrators individually yes. I found the presentation extremely distasteful. I am not a fan of ensemble casts, but this is very bad. And God (tympani) said (women singing vowels -AAAAAA, OOOO, UUUU) strike them with the edge of the sword (Smack, Biff, Whap) and there will be crying and gnashing of teeth (weeping screaming) etc. etc. I kind of think the book stands on its own, or should. Most of the actors were clearly told to overact and took the direction to heart. The text is not segregated into books in a manner that could be referenced easily.
When it was blessedly over.
To many, most seeming to be competing to overact the others. Michael York, one of my favorite narrators, was a refreshing exception.
The text stands on its own, but it was not left alone.
I am sympathetic to Michael Pollan’s way of thinking about food so this was an interesting presentation of what I already believe. I would recommend this book to those of like minds, for example if you enjoyed The Omnivore’s Dilemma. However, I have the same criticism as I did of his previous work. It tends to be a little on the officious side, and as much as I like Scott Brick, he is the wrong narrator for this book. A little officious become downright pompous with Brick’s narration. If I did not agree with the content it would be difficult to finish the book.
Obviously you are interested in the history of the period or you would not be looking at the reviews, so this book is for you. It is well researched and presented and a good read, but not a casual one. If you have no familiarity with the area or time I might suggest some primers first. It is a rather quick stroke through the Peloponnesian War and surrounding waters. I think the Athenian navy being the source of democracy is a stretch, but points are well made and the history is fascinating. A map will help.
David Drummond does a masterful narration on a difficult script.
It is hard to recommend this. Perhaps if you are into 1960 science fiction and have a good suspension of reality ability. Character development is ok and action is suspenseful at times.
I am normally a fan of Scott Brick, but I have to ask what happened? He drags the dialog and the voices sound enough alike to be confusing. I would caution not to disregard other books he narrates because of this one.
It is difficult for me to understand how I could be so interested in such a long book filled with characters that I have such little sympathy for. But there you have it; I did enjoy it and would recommend it to anyone interested in the period. Well, not anyone, if you are offended by overt racist comments, this would call for some thickening of the skin. Scarlett did strain credulity with being so scatter brained in some areas and insightful in others.
Linda Stephens is wonderful. Character voices are clear consistent and enjoyable. I will look for more from her.
If you are looking for a historical novel of this period check out The Greatest Knight and The Scarlet Lion. For a murder mystery perhaps Medicus. I found myself wishing the author would move the plot along. There is a lack of surprises and twists that should make a book like this captivating. The characters are well developed and sympathetic.
I did enjoy this listen I think mostly for the exceptional narration of Paul Matthews.
I would highly recommend to anyone interested in angles, demons, or just a lighthearted read about death, destruction, and the end of days. I agree a taste for English humor is necessary (footnote, not British because I am sure the Welsh and Scotts are knee slapping hysterical if you could just understand them, and, well, is there humor in Ireland?).
Mr. Jarvis does a wonderful job of narration, but the complaint that there is no separation between jumps to different settings is valid (footnote, entirely cleared up if you have a fish in your ear).
Engaging story that I would recommend to anyone who needs a break from The History of Rome part one to many. The story progresses in well written prose without the suspension of disbelief being overly taxed. The good characters are quite sympathetic while the bad ones are quite despicable.
Linn Redgrave's narration is exceptional. Her voices are easily identifiable with each character and consistent throughout. I thought her good enough to look for other titles with her which are surprisingly few.
I would recommend this to anyone interested in Conan Doyle, his work, or the history of the turn of the previous century. Well written and sympathetic. A case could be made that it is a little too sympathetic, but if it was not so Conan Doyle could easily be portrayed as a nut case. As it is, the latter portion of his life is more comfortable to listen to. His wit is well displayed which also makes for a good read.
Richard Matthews as usual does a stellar job. It is, however, a little un-nerving to hear Felix Leiter (the American CIA agent in Casino Royal) as the voice of the American newspapers. Perhaps he borrowed the voice from Simon Vance or Robert Whitfield.
I would recommend to anyone interested in the life of TR, history between the civil war and WWI, or the Roosevelt family. I think it a little dry for a casual read. There is little of the TR humor and the shear drama is understated. Well researched and scholarly. I thought it a well balanced presentation.
Suzanne Toren does a wonderful job narrating. I have to say that this one begs for a male voice. I know the author is a woman; TR was an ardent supporter of suffrage, just saying.
Report Inappropriate Content