Take a photo of a barcode or cover
samantha_duncan 's review for:
3.75 stars. A lot of mixed feelings here, but reading this was overall a very positive, thought-provoking experience. There is so much research here about the history of hoaxes, and the (not) surprising thing is how much all the fakery is steeped in race and racism. That this book looks at hoaxes through a racial lens really elevates it to the "essential reading" category and provokes a more nuanced discussion of the subject. I think there's something in here that will interest everybody...personally, I enjoyed the later chapters on journalism and literature.
That said, Bunk is not at all a casual read. It caught my eye mostly because of my interest in Kevin Young's work as a poet...also because it's called Bunk, how can you not want to read a book with that kind of title? In any case, I kind of jumped into it on a whim and wasn't altogether prepared for the undertaking. The subject may suggest a fun, pop-psychology leaning, but this book is long and sort of dry and dense as hell. I'm never one to shy away from big books, but a stronger editorial hand would have benefited Bunk - cutting down on less relevant information, structuring it in a less scatterbrained way, and yes (sadly) correcting typos. It's painfully obvious, for instance, that the chapter on Rachel Dolezal was a last-minute addition, as it's stylistically and formally inconsistent with the rest of the book. Dolezal is definitely a vital addition to this conversation, and Young's commentary on her is otherwise on point.
So, tl;dr, I enthusiastically recommend this book for its cultural and historical relevance and intrigue, but be prepared to commit to some heavy lifting.
That said, Bunk is not at all a casual read. It caught my eye mostly because of my interest in Kevin Young's work as a poet...also because it's called Bunk, how can you not want to read a book with that kind of title? In any case, I kind of jumped into it on a whim and wasn't altogether prepared for the undertaking. The subject may suggest a fun, pop-psychology leaning, but this book is long and sort of dry and dense as hell. I'm never one to shy away from big books, but a stronger editorial hand would have benefited Bunk - cutting down on less relevant information, structuring it in a less scatterbrained way, and yes (sadly) correcting typos. It's painfully obvious, for instance, that the chapter on Rachel Dolezal was a last-minute addition, as it's stylistically and formally inconsistent with the rest of the book. Dolezal is definitely a vital addition to this conversation, and Young's commentary on her is otherwise on point.
So, tl;dr, I enthusiastically recommend this book for its cultural and historical relevance and intrigue, but be prepared to commit to some heavy lifting.