Take a photo of a barcode or cover
lauraborkpower 's review for:
The Man from Beijing
by Henning Mankell
I don't exactly know why I finished reading this book. I started it because it is a "stand-alone masterpiece" from the author of the Wallander mystery series, which is a series I've been interested in picking up. But I doubt I'll read them now, and might just watch the PBS mini-series.
The Man From Beijing is an overly complex, plodding bore. I'd like to attribute the monotone dullness to the translation, but I can't do that with any certainty, since this is the first of Mankell's books I've read. But the style is so flat that I dreaded picking it up each day. Again, I beg the question, why did I finish this book?
I think it's because I kept hoping that it would get better--that the massacre of an entire village of people that begins the story would come back in thrilleresque detail. But that never happens. Mankell tells a story that is much, much too complicated for a single book, and never tense or dramatic. Could it have been a trilogy? Sure, why not? Then he could have really explored the political aspects that take up so much of the plot but never quite feel connected to the massacre. It's not quite a political thriller, and it's not quite a murder/serial killer mystery, and it's not quite a tale of historically motivated revenge. It's a book that tries to be all three of these things in 454 pages, but it never takes off. So, the reader is really just stuck with a hodge-podge of seemingly related subplots told in the most snoozeworthy narrative style I've ever read.
The Man From Beijing is an overly complex, plodding bore. I'd like to attribute the monotone dullness to the translation, but I can't do that with any certainty, since this is the first of Mankell's books I've read. But the style is so flat that I dreaded picking it up each day. Again, I beg the question, why did I finish this book?
I think it's because I kept hoping that it would get better--that the massacre of an entire village of people that begins the story would come back in thrilleresque detail. But that never happens. Mankell tells a story that is much, much too complicated for a single book, and never tense or dramatic. Could it have been a trilogy? Sure, why not? Then he could have really explored the political aspects that take up so much of the plot but never quite feel connected to the massacre. It's not quite a political thriller, and it's not quite a murder/serial killer mystery, and it's not quite a tale of historically motivated revenge. It's a book that tries to be all three of these things in 454 pages, but it never takes off. So, the reader is really just stuck with a hodge-podge of seemingly related subplots told in the most snoozeworthy narrative style I've ever read.