I wanted to like this book - not because I am anti-Muslim but because I do think that, for a variety of reasons, much modern scholarship is hypercritical of Western history and much less critical of non-western history. Don't misunderstand -- much of western history is not honorable -- however, the same can be said of other cultures and I don't think the West is worse than any other. In fact, in spite of many defects, it has been the fountain of freedom and equality as well as technology, etc.
Regarding this book, however, the author did not make a good case. What he said may well be true -- but he did not make a case for it. What's more, many times his argument seemed to be, "Yes, the Crusaders were bad but the Muslims were also bad and Eastern Orthodox Christians were without conscience (I am not Eastern Orthodox, btw).
In the end, I was left to conclude that he started with an assumption and then wrote about it.
I realize no one probably writes without bias, even when she/he tries, but I think we can get closer to the truth if we at least make the attempt. I did not feel I was closer to the actual truth after reading this book.
The narrator and the corny sounding dramatization
I like the O. Henry story itself.
Her accent was not a pleasant one. Nor was her tone of voice. Then, whenever someone spoke, there was an insertion of a male voice with the vibrato turned up. Very distracting and corny.
I love the story but I didn't finish this audio version because of the narration.
I think I probably don't, for the most part, like most historical romances and this book certainly didn't change my mind.
I don't normally read romance. I do love history but historical romance seems to not be something I care for.
The narrator did a good job considering what she had to work with. The writing style was not great.
Disappointment, disbelief, offense.
This is supposed to be a modern day story of the book of Hosea but so much in this book disturbed me. Really, the guy in the story stalked the woman, a prostitute. Then he basically kidnapped her after she was beaten almost to death by her pimp. While she was still very ill from injuries, he called in a minister to marry them, getting her to say a feeble "Why not?" in place of the "I do" while she was still in bed, injured, confused and not mentally competent due to the beating. H then took her home to his farm and wonders why she wants to get away.
Sorry, the God I know doesn't violate people people's wills.
If you want a book that makes it okay to stalk women, overwhelm them while they are too sick to speak up for themselves because God tells you to do it --- well...you'll like this book. But I suggest you read a little history on women's issues.
BTW, I am an evangelical Christian, and I believe the Biblical story of Hosea is a beautiful story of God's unconditional love for us. But this was not the same story.
I have read or listened to almost all of Beaton's books - Hamish McBeth and Mrs. Raisin. I liked them all but this one was missing something, besides being unbelievable.
Also, while the narrator isn't bad and I wouldn't mind him in another book, his performance in this one was a disappointment. For one thing, he was just too British sounding for a story in the Scottish highlands. But he also just didn't capture Hamish's personality.
I wouldn't listen to another Hamish McBeth book with him. He might be "okay" in other locations.
It wasn't horrible... I did listen to it.. but I wouldn't be inspired to read another Beaton book if I didn't know her other books were better.
I didn't care much about the characters and I didn't think the book had the
I very much dislike horror and have never read a Stephen King novel or seen a movie adaption. I've always heard he was a very skilled story-teller, though, so when this book came out, I thought it would be a great opportunity to enjoy a great writer. I like both history and time travel, and was 11 when Kennedy was assassinated so it also sounded interesting from that point of view as well.
Perhaps I expected too much but i was disappointed.
For me, the most important thing is a book is that I care about the main characters. I didn't dislike the main characters, but neither did I like them or care much if their lives worked out.
A second thing I require in a book is that if it is set in the past, I want to truly feel immersed in that past. In reviews, I read that King had researched the price of groceries in 1958, etc. Well, so what if you get the correct price of groceries but don't create the atmosphere of 1958-63? It
I usually only buy audible books that have 10 hours plus listening time (more for the money!) but bought The Kalahari Typing School for Gentlemen when I was sick with a cold and wanted to listen to something light (I had read the previous 4 books the old-fashioned way). But after listening to Ms. Lecat's narration, I've ordered the next in the series from Audible too. Both she and Mma Ramatswe rock!
If you haven't listened to a No. 1 Detective Agency Series, i recommend it. Not exciting crime here --just human foibles investigated by a delightful cast led by the traditionally build Mma Ramatswe.
I have never had much interest in visiting Africa but after reading this series (and seeing the HBO/BBC television mini series), I find myself wishing I could go to Botswana and walk the streets of Gabarone, visit the African mall, and drink bush tea on the porch of a nice, traditionally built Botswanan woman, though I doubt if any real person could measure up to Precious Ramatswe.
Generally, I enjoyed the book and learned many things.
That being said, before buying this book, you should know: Napolitano is an ardent libertarian, 2)he is, to put it mildly, opinionated 3)in at least one instance, maybe two, in my opinion, his opinions "border" on conspiracist 3)some people will be offended by his treatment of Lincoln and other publicly revered persons - he ignores the tension Lincoln felt between his desire to see an end to slavery and his desire to save the union, saying (incorrectly) that he [Lincoln] was not concerned about slavery prior to the war - he also calls him a tyrant due to his actions re; the press during the War (actually, I'd agree on the latter, but still, some people don't like their idols torn down, so i am warning you) and finally, the Judge seems to use the argument of state's rights when it is convenient and the argument against state's rights when that is convenient.
Nevertheless, with those caviats, I highly recommend the book. You may not agree with Napolitano's opinions but the book is quite helpful for understanding the thinking behind libertarianism and those who believe original intent. It may even convince you.
I' m sure this kind of book isn't for everyone, but if you like Jane Marple or Emily Pollifax, you'll like Georgie. An amusing cozy mystery/adventure in which a young royal (35th in line for the throne) adjusts to having no money, no household help and tries to survive by doing menial work and special investigations for the queen.
The narrator does an excellent job.
I first checked this book out of my school library in 1961. I was a 10 year old book worm from a dysfunctional alcoholic family who wanted to run away from them all and have total control of my life. I knew I couldn't do so, but did I ever enjoy reading about how Sam did it - and how, in the end, he realized he needed people in his life, too.
Much of this book I found fascinating. I grew up hearing about the death march and reading more details was sobering. I was disappointed that there were several people who figured into the story whose ultimate fates you did not end. Perhaps the authors couldn't get details if they died in the war or even afterwards. But i am sure that even if they couldn't furnish details, they could have at least determined if they survived the captivity itself. I would like to have known.
This book is probably okay for what it is -- I was just expecting something different.
It gives the lobbying and legislative history of both prohibition and repeal in some detail. It also talks some about the lawlessness of gangsters that occurred in the '20's and touches on the instability of a society that basically nullifies a law by ignoring it.
I felt it did not do justice to the things that led to Prohibition. Don't misunderstand -- I am not pro-prohibition. In fact, I'm for the legalization of drugs. Nevertheless, while the author did talk about the role of women and women's suffrage in connection with the law, it did not really go into any detail about *why* women supported it - in other words, the social problems women, who were without legal rights or protection in a society where saloons were all men bastions and drunkeness often resulted in poverty and abuse against which they had no recourse. Instead, the author concentrated on anti-immigrant feelings which certainly were a factor, but not the whole story.
So, for a bare-line history, an okay book. For analysis, not so good - even in those areas he addressed.
Report Inappropriate Content