Scan barcode
merylsalerno's review
3.0
I think this would've been a 4/5 star book if I had read it when it was written (assuming I was old enough to appreciate it of course). That being said, I had the entire book figured out about 20% of the way through and it was really pissing me off that no one could figure out the big mystery. I still enjoyed the book, and it definitely kept me interested, but the story is definitely not as sensational now as I'm sure it was in the early 90s.
santreads's review
3.0
One thing that amazed me about this book was that it was written in 1995 - clearly way ahead of its time. I sniggered when they spoke of 'floppy discs'. If they only knew.
It was good, but I felt like they dragged it out a little. Still a good one time read.
It was good, but I felt like they dragged it out a little. Still a good one time read.
susanhert's review against another edition
Part of the premise of this book is rather ridiculous (research involving identical twins that were raised by different parents where one is a criminal and the other is not) and I just don't need to read this kind of stuff right now.
carosbcher's review against another edition
2.0
Steven Logan, ein attraktiver, großer, junger Mann reist aufgrund einer Einladung zu einem Forschungsprojekt an die JFU. Dort soll er als Versuchsperson einige Tests über sich ergehen lassen - doch dann endet alles in einem großen Durcheinander, die Professorin auf der Straße und Steven im Gefängnis. Er wird angeklagt, eine junge Frau brutal vergewaltigt zu haben, die er jedoch noch nie gesehen hat, die ihn jedoch wiederum bei der Gegenüberstellung identifiziert hat.
Mein erster Ken Follett und ich bin ein wenig enttäuscht. Von einem so großen Namen hätte ich mehr erwartet. Ich hoffe, seine historischen Romane sind besser...nicht, dass mir dieser Thriller nicht gefallen hätte. Nein, er war spannend, es gab Geheimnisse und eine Verschwörung, aber damit schien mir das Buch etwas wie nach einem festen Schema aufgezogen, was eine scheinbar schnell eingebaute und damit etwas unrealistisch wirkende Liebesgeschichte nicht besser machte. Noch eine kleine Prise Mystik und ich würde keinen Unterschied zwischen diesem Ken Follett und einem Dan Brown ohne Robert Langdon bemerken. Mir hat einfach etwas Eigenes, Auffälliges, Herausstechendes gefehlt. Noch dazu wird mit dem Titel und in der Inhaltsbeschreibung schon die Hälfte des Rätsels verraten, dessen Reste auch im Laufe des Buchs noch durchschaubar werden, sodass mich am Ende einzig noch Details überraschten. Also besser nicht die Rückseite des Buchs anschauen!!
Mein erster Ken Follett und ich bin ein wenig enttäuscht. Von einem so großen Namen hätte ich mehr erwartet. Ich hoffe, seine historischen Romane sind besser...nicht, dass mir dieser Thriller nicht gefallen hätte. Nein, er war spannend, es gab Geheimnisse und eine Verschwörung, aber damit schien mir das Buch etwas wie nach einem festen Schema aufgezogen, was eine scheinbar schnell eingebaute und damit etwas unrealistisch wirkende Liebesgeschichte nicht besser machte. Noch eine kleine Prise Mystik und ich würde keinen Unterschied zwischen diesem Ken Follett und einem Dan Brown ohne Robert Langdon bemerken. Mir hat einfach etwas Eigenes, Auffälliges, Herausstechendes gefehlt. Noch dazu wird mit dem Titel und in der Inhaltsbeschreibung schon die Hälfte des Rätsels verraten, dessen Reste auch im Laufe des Buchs noch durchschaubar werden, sodass mich am Ende einzig noch Details überraschten. Also besser nicht die Rückseite des Buchs anschauen!!
kelleyo's review
4.0
Good book but because it was written in 1996 some parts were glaringly dated. Concept and execution were good though. Very enjoyable read.
reader_fictions's review
3.0
When I was in high school, I really loved Ken Follett’s books. I read a whole bunch of them, and The Third Twin was one of my personal favorites. When it popped up in the PRH audiobook reviewer email, since it’s only just getting an audiobook, I decided the time to reread had come. As expected, The Third Twin was nowhere near as good as I remembered, but it wasn’t awful, so I guess this is a win?
For a book written in the late nineties by a white male author about rape culture, The Third Twin‘s remarkably okay. It gets a bit preachy and overt with its messages, but Follett does get the messages across for the most part. Racism and sexism are clearly addressed, though of course the main characters are all white. The most problematic element for me was that Jeannie refused to believe her friend when she asserted that Steve was the man who raped her; Jeannie disagreed because of his psychological profile but that wasn’t enough without further evidence. There’s been much better stuff written on rape culture since, but, given the era it appeared in, I was surprised it wasn’t a complete offensive mess.
I also give Follett credit for being somewhat decent at writing women. There’s definitely some creepy sexualization, but he does avoid turning them all into MPDGs and they do have varied interests. Again, my feelings are mixed here, and I could have done without the constant reminders about how incredibly hot Jeannie is, but it wasn’t totally atrocious. In high school, I very much shipped Jeannie and Steve, but as an adult I’m seriously puzzled by it. Apparently as a kid, I was a lot more trusting or something. Or maybe I was just really hard up for good ships. *shrug*
The best/worst part of The Third Twin is how hilariously dated it is. There’s a lot of explanation of the internet, floppy disks, and praise of Jeannie’s program that can scan basic data. This is an excellent example of why authors don’t often write books that are on the cutting edge of technology. The nature versus nurture idea is an interesting one, and Follett conveys a concept for readers who aren’t especially educated. If you’re more knowledgeable in this arena, there’s a lot of lecturing.
Plot-wise, another bit of hilarity is that the big twist is given away in the title. Maybe they did that so that it would be more acceptable that Jeannie doesn’t believe her friend? Because the readers all know that there’s a third twin who is most likely the rapist? Who the fuck knows tbh, but I’ll be over here laughing about the title for ages.
I will not be reading The Third Twinagain. Three stars is over-generous, but LaVoy did a nice job with her narration and I’m adding in half a nostalgia point. Also, it was better than I was expecting, which makes me feel kindly disposed to it. However, I wouldn’t really recommend picking this one up; there are better, more current books on these subjects.
For a book written in the late nineties by a white male author about rape culture, The Third Twin‘s remarkably okay. It gets a bit preachy and overt with its messages, but Follett does get the messages across for the most part. Racism and sexism are clearly addressed, though of course the main characters are all white. The most problematic element for me was that Jeannie refused to believe her friend when she asserted that Steve was the man who raped her; Jeannie disagreed because of his psychological profile but that wasn’t enough without further evidence. There’s been much better stuff written on rape culture since, but, given the era it appeared in, I was surprised it wasn’t a complete offensive mess.
I also give Follett credit for being somewhat decent at writing women. There’s definitely some creepy sexualization, but he does avoid turning them all into MPDGs and they do have varied interests. Again, my feelings are mixed here, and I could have done without the constant reminders about how incredibly hot Jeannie is, but it wasn’t totally atrocious. In high school, I very much shipped Jeannie and Steve, but as an adult I’m seriously puzzled by it. Apparently as a kid, I was a lot more trusting or something. Or maybe I was just really hard up for good ships. *shrug*
The best/worst part of The Third Twin is how hilariously dated it is. There’s a lot of explanation of the internet, floppy disks, and praise of Jeannie’s program that can scan basic data. This is an excellent example of why authors don’t often write books that are on the cutting edge of technology. The nature versus nurture idea is an interesting one, and Follett conveys a concept for readers who aren’t especially educated. If you’re more knowledgeable in this arena, there’s a lot of lecturing.
Plot-wise, another bit of hilarity is that the big twist is given away in the title. Maybe they did that so that it would be more acceptable that Jeannie doesn’t believe her friend? Because the readers all know that there’s a third twin who is most likely the rapist? Who the fuck knows tbh, but I’ll be over here laughing about the title for ages.
I will not be reading The Third Twinagain. Three stars is over-generous, but LaVoy did a nice job with her narration and I’m adding in half a nostalgia point. Also, it was better than I was expecting, which makes me feel kindly disposed to it. However, I wouldn’t really recommend picking this one up; there are better, more current books on these subjects.
raehink's review
2.0
A medical thriller, more in the tradition of Robin Cook, in which twins are cloned. I enjoyed the story but it does have a lot of rough language.
More...