LISTENER

Robert

CHICAGO, IL, United States
  • 2
  • reviews
  • 5
  • helpful votes
  • 2
  • ratings

Wonderfully entertaining and engaging

Overall
5 out of 5 stars
Performance
5 out of 5 stars
Story
4 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 03-29-13

Would you consider the audio edition of The Patriarch to be better than the print version?

Yes, the narration was a plus to the story.

What other book might you compare The Patriarch to and why?

It's hard to say as it was somewhat contemporary, thus one feels like you were around at the time. On the other hand we got wonderful insights on a man who functioned in this world we think we know. You can't compare it to a biography of say Churchill; more like Howard Hughes. (Who was that, Irving?0

Have you listened to any of Malcolm Hillgartner’s other performances before? How does this one compare?

Don't recall, but this was great.

Was there a moment in the book that particularly moved you?

What moved me? It's not that sort of narrative. You feel like you are getting an inside look at a very complicated man and his relationships with his family, friends and his own conscious. I could not wait to get back to it.

Any additional comments?

Nassau did a lot of homework and it shows. He is an excellent writer. The subtlety used to draw out very difficult topics and subjects gives it credibility. You find yourself impatiently waiting to get to the next stage of his life.
The narrator did a masterful job and added to the enjoyment of this book.

4 of 4 people found this review helpful

Disappointed. Justice O'Connor "mailed it in".

Overall
2 out of 5 stars
Performance
2 out of 5 stars
Story
2 out of 5 stars

Reviewed: 03-29-13

Would you try another book from Sandra Day O'Connor and/or Sandra Day O'Connor?

This book lacked insight into the Court and how they make decisions. (What I expected I guess.)

What was most disappointing about Sandra Day O'Connor’s story?

It was an elementary history of the Court and offered little new insights to the history. I had expected much more out of Justice O'Connor, someone I admire greatly.

How did the narrator detract from the book?

Justice O'Connor narrates the book and may have been the most compelling aspect of the enterprise. It seems her strength and toughness come through from her "style" of speaking.

If you could play editor, what scene or scenes would you have cut from Out of Order?

Hard to say what you'd leave in.

Any additional comments?

I don't believe she will get a second chance nor do I believe she had any desire to expose the inner most views on the Court or individual justices. I was not looking for a "tell all" or "snarky" details of personal habits. Rather, I felt short changed on insights of how the Court worked, decision making process or application of legal "logic".
How about showing two opposing interpretations of the Constitution and how an attempt to reconcile may have happened. For example, is Gay marriage equal protection? If not, why not. All in the context of the Constitution.
She could have left us with a better understanding of how reasonable people could disagree or whether predisposition of ideas and concepts cannot be changed.
That did not happen; it was "paint by numbers" sadly.

1 of 2 people found this review helpful