You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
mackle13 's review for:
The Man Who Loved Books Too Much
by Allison Hoover Bartlett
The book has a cool premise - following a book thief, trying to understand his motivations and whatnot, and also following the man whose quest it is to stop the thief.
And yet...
I think it could've been cool as a sort of "based on true story" kind of fiction. I think it could've even worked better if the author wrote it focusing on the people in the story more than herself.
See, she spoke a lot about what she did to get the story. The interviews she did, the research she undertook, her ethical dilemmas when the book thief started telling her of some of his crimes... It felt like the book was often more about her and her search than it was about the thief and the "detective".
More than that, the writing was circular and repetitive. She would talk about the 'world of literary obsession', give examples of different people's interactions in the world, go on about how she didn't entirely understand it, and a chapter or so later we'd go through the same routine with maybe a few different examples.
Similarly with Gilkey, in trying to 'understand his motives'. He didn't seem all that complex - he has a huge entitlement issue, thinks the world owes him, thinks that the world would think highly of him if he had a massive rare book collection, doesn't have the means to do so and, because of his sense of entitlement, rationalizes his thefts as his dues.
I mean, Bartlett would pretty much say this in so many words, and then still act like he was this hard to understand figure, and continue to explore his psyche in ever more elaborate circles which all amounted to the same thing.
And she seemed to give our detective the short shrift, in general.
Overall, very disappointing reading on what could've been an interesting story/topic. I'm only giving it 2 stars instead of 1 because there were some interesting tidbits here and there and I didn't hate it - which is what I usually reserve 1 stars for.
And yet...
I think it could've been cool as a sort of "based on true story" kind of fiction. I think it could've even worked better if the author wrote it focusing on the people in the story more than herself.
See, she spoke a lot about what she did to get the story. The interviews she did, the research she undertook, her ethical dilemmas when the book thief started telling her of some of his crimes... It felt like the book was often more about her and her search than it was about the thief and the "detective".
More than that, the writing was circular and repetitive. She would talk about the 'world of literary obsession', give examples of different people's interactions in the world, go on about how she didn't entirely understand it, and a chapter or so later we'd go through the same routine with maybe a few different examples.
Similarly with Gilkey, in trying to 'understand his motives'. He didn't seem all that complex - he has a huge entitlement issue, thinks the world owes him, thinks that the world would think highly of him if he had a massive rare book collection, doesn't have the means to do so and, because of his sense of entitlement, rationalizes his thefts as his dues.
I mean, Bartlett would pretty much say this in so many words, and then still act like he was this hard to understand figure, and continue to explore his psyche in ever more elaborate circles which all amounted to the same thing.
And she seemed to give our detective the short shrift, in general.
Overall, very disappointing reading on what could've been an interesting story/topic. I'm only giving it 2 stars instead of 1 because there were some interesting tidbits here and there and I didn't hate it - which is what I usually reserve 1 stars for.