Take a photo of a barcode or cover
janyriy 's review for:
3.8 ⭐️
This is a very thorough account (I'd argue, sometimes too thorough) of the Ted Bundy case from a unique perspective. I understand Rule's predicament and I even understand how she refused to believe he was guilty for the longest time. We simply don't want to see our own judgment in people so upended, because we think we know people, or must have some kind of sense that would let us detect 'evil'. Turns out, we really don't in most cases.
Despite that, the book does lean into his 'good sides' a lot. So much so, that you start wondering and doubting yourself. I don't know if this was intentional or not, but at a few points I found myself thinking 'aw poor Ted', even though I knew he'd confessed. "But he didn't steal that poor girls car and instead put it back, he only stole from people that could afford the loss" - the man was a serial killer, I think we can all agree that he had neither empathy nor compassion.
Over all, it is extremely well researched, the time stamps and pacing is meticulous and the crimes are neither downplayed nor dramatised.
I will say, though, (and this is a pet peeve) the book is full of typos. Honestly it came out in 1980 and no editor had another look at it? There's words and quotation marks missing from sentences, "Oa" instead of "On", words aren't capitalised at the beginning of a sentence, names are spelled this and then that way, "be" instead of "he"…and more.
Another thing that kind of annoyed me in the end was her lamenting the fact that she 'had to go to these talk shows on the day of Bundy's execution when she'd rather been home'. Lady, I'm sure no one forced you to talk about the man on live TV while he was being executed.
Anyhow, overall it's still a great book and extremely fascinating.
This is a very thorough account (I'd argue, sometimes too thorough) of the Ted Bundy case from a unique perspective. I understand Rule's predicament and I even understand how she refused to believe he was guilty for the longest time. We simply don't want to see our own judgment in people so upended, because we think we know people, or must have some kind of sense that would let us detect 'evil'. Turns out, we really don't in most cases.
Despite that, the book does lean into his 'good sides' a lot. So much so, that you start wondering and doubting yourself. I don't know if this was intentional or not, but at a few points I found myself thinking 'aw poor Ted', even though I knew he'd confessed. "But he didn't steal that poor girls car and instead put it back, he only stole from people that could afford the loss" - the man was a serial killer, I think we can all agree that he had neither empathy nor compassion.
Over all, it is extremely well researched, the time stamps and pacing is meticulous and the crimes are neither downplayed nor dramatised.
I will say, though, (and this is a pet peeve) the book is full of typos. Honestly it came out in 1980 and no editor had another look at it? There's words and quotation marks missing from sentences, "Oa" instead of "On", words aren't capitalised at the beginning of a sentence, names are spelled this and then that way, "be" instead of "he"…and more.
Another thing that kind of annoyed me in the end was her lamenting the fact that she 'had to go to these talk shows on the day of Bundy's execution when she'd rather been home'. Lady, I'm sure no one forced you to talk about the man on live TV while he was being executed.
Anyhow, overall it's still a great book and extremely fascinating.