Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.09 AVERAGE
3.09 AVERAGE
I really, really wanted to like this book as much as I had liked Killing Lincoln and Killing Kennedy, but it was not nearly as good. The "present day" sections of the book were annoying. Patterson seemed self-promoting in those sections, which was not helpful. Also, I was left completely unconvinced about King Tut's actual demise. Nothing that was said in this book convinced me that he was actually murdered.
I would not call this nonfiction. Historical fiction, yes, and entertaining, but not complete fact. It's interesting to see his perspective and how he came to these conclusions, but he also spells everything out so the reader isn't left to contemplate much. A very easy read.
Okay, I gave this a 1. If it was possible I would have given it a 0. Why? It's simple really:
Patterson claimed that he reaserched Tutankhamun and his life, and death, extensively. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. I just didn't see that research there, either way. Yes, there is speculation that the young ruler was murdered, but Patterson lets that speculation rule this book. There is no hinting at a different possibility. There is no mention of the king's diseased legs and feet, or of his severly injured leg. He also claims, in the title, that this is a work of non-fiction. However, that is untrue. Over half of the book is to be considered historical fiction, as it is set during Tutankhamun's life and not during modern times.
I'm 17, and even I know more that what is written in this book. I would NOT recommend it to any of my friends or family.
Oh, and one more thing. If Patterson did research, where is it shown? There is no bibliography, no works cited section. Personally, I think any of my Language Arts teachers would have ripped me to shreds if I had done what Patterson does. Just a word of caution.
Patterson claimed that he reaserched Tutankhamun and his life, and death, extensively. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. I just didn't see that research there, either way. Yes, there is speculation that the young ruler was murdered, but Patterson lets that speculation rule this book. There is no hinting at a different possibility. There is no mention of the king's diseased legs and feet, or of his severly injured leg. He also claims, in the title, that this is a work of non-fiction. However, that is untrue. Over half of the book is to be considered historical fiction, as it is set during Tutankhamun's life and not during modern times.
I'm 17, and even I know more that what is written in this book. I would NOT recommend it to any of my friends or family.
Oh, and one more thing. If Patterson did research, where is it shown? There is no bibliography, no works cited section. Personally, I think any of my Language Arts teachers would have ripped me to shreds if I had done what Patterson does. Just a word of caution.
I hate to say it, but I think I need to stop reading James Patterson. Except for the Womens Murder Club, that is. The King Tut bit I loved, and want to read more on him. The archaeologist bit - so-so - James Patterson's story of discovery - sorry, loved you for a long time, want to keep loving you, but no.
This is a great story but I don’t think it solves anything. So I really do like the story created for Tut and the back and forth between Tut and Carter’s lives but I’m just left with questions.
Wow, I'm honestly amazed at how much I disliked this reading experience. And I'm a little perplexed that this was at the hand of James Patterson. So where did this go so wrong?
First, and probably most importantly, this book is NOT non-fiction. I actually picked this up in the "Egyptology" section of a local used bookstore. I didn't think to read the jacket as I was promised a non-fiction thriller about King Tut. My fault, because this isn't nonfiction. At best, this is historical fiction... I daresay this is even bad historical fiction.
Reading this as historical fiction you'll find that the characters lack depth, resolutions are later told to the reader (did we read that Ankhe wanted Tut dead--not exactly but later Patterson says it is so). Everything is fiction in the sense we don't know if certain events even happened --which is fine if the historical fiction you're getting is at least good. Not this.
There are also three storylines. One is Patterson trying to convince his agent to publish this and trying to convince others that he's figured out the mysteries of King Tut. This storyline, I'm sorry, was stupid. His agent should have said out this project in the backburner. Nor as a reader so I want to read Patterson proclaim he's done "so much" research on Tut. Well, so have scholars that wrote dissertations in Tut (and their dissertations have way more factual evidence than this). Whatever research was done, not a single works cited appears at the end. Yeah, not a single cited source.
Second storyline is about Howard Carter, who is an Egyptologist that eventually finds Tut's tomb. Okay... Didn't expect to read about this either. I didn't see it as necessary to the story. It was, for lack of a better word, boring.
The third storyline is the one I wanted. Ancient Egypt. Pharaohs. The Nile. Tut. Unfortunately, this piece of historical fiction falls flat and isn't fully fleshed out. There was a lot left to be desired. Which is sad because this is what I wanted to read about.
Utterly disappointing. I wish Patterson would give readers money back for this... This isn't nonfiction and I feel a bit tricked.
First, and probably most importantly, this book is NOT non-fiction. I actually picked this up in the "Egyptology" section of a local used bookstore. I didn't think to read the jacket as I was promised a non-fiction thriller about King Tut. My fault, because this isn't nonfiction. At best, this is historical fiction... I daresay this is even bad historical fiction.
Reading this as historical fiction you'll find that the characters lack depth, resolutions are later told to the reader (did we read that Ankhe wanted Tut dead--not exactly but later Patterson says it is so). Everything is fiction in the sense we don't know if certain events even happened --which is fine if the historical fiction you're getting is at least good. Not this.
There are also three storylines. One is Patterson trying to convince his agent to publish this and trying to convince others that he's figured out the mysteries of King Tut. This storyline, I'm sorry, was stupid. His agent should have said out this project in the backburner. Nor as a reader so I want to read Patterson proclaim he's done "so much" research on Tut. Well, so have scholars that wrote dissertations in Tut (and their dissertations have way more factual evidence than this). Whatever research was done, not a single works cited appears at the end. Yeah, not a single cited source.
Second storyline is about Howard Carter, who is an Egyptologist that eventually finds Tut's tomb. Okay... Didn't expect to read about this either. I didn't see it as necessary to the story. It was, for lack of a better word, boring.
The third storyline is the one I wanted. Ancient Egypt. Pharaohs. The Nile. Tut. Unfortunately, this piece of historical fiction falls flat and isn't fully fleshed out. There was a lot left to be desired. Which is sad because this is what I wanted to read about.
Utterly disappointing. I wish Patterson would give readers money back for this... This isn't nonfiction and I feel a bit tricked.
adventurous
dark
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
informative
mysterious
medium-paced
Nah don't do it to yourself - 2*
Luckily, I bought this at a library sale in York 3 years ago and it was very cheap...so I'm not that disappointed it is that bad...
The idea seemed genius and I was totally there until James Patterson appears in the book and the story jumps to three different time periods and I hated it. I just wanted to focus on who killed King Tut but there's the back story of Howard Carter and James Patterson keeps popping up.
Read something else of James Patterson...or anything different.
I've been stuck in a reading slump for days and this did not get me out of it.
Luckily, I bought this at a library sale in York 3 years ago and it was very cheap...so I'm not that disappointed it is that bad...
The idea seemed genius and I was totally there until James Patterson appears in the book and the story jumps to three different time periods and I hated it. I just wanted to focus on who killed King Tut but there's the back story of Howard Carter and James Patterson keeps popping up.
Read something else of James Patterson...or anything different.
I've been stuck in a reading slump for days and this did not get me out of it.