|
|
Post by Jas. Watson on Jun 3, 2016 15:03:24 GMT -6
Has anyone else read this book? I would love to hear if it was thought as bad as I thought. The premise attracted me, but I ended up just skimming through the ungodly amount of maundering prolixity and ultimately threw it down in disgust. It seemed that the errors were so bad, obvious, and plentiful that they must have been done on purpose--for some reason--sort of as a parody or something.
Anyone else encountered this one?
|
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jun 3, 2016 16:31:53 GMT -6
Never read, there is much crap out there!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jas. Watson on Jun 3, 2016 20:10:47 GMT -6
And this one is right up there!
|
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Jun 4, 2016 5:58:33 GMT -6
Playing Custer is work of fiction. Author is playing a writing game, like a freshman college course. He is experimenting with multiple points of view, in different eras.
I would expect no insight into history or fact, that is not what he is trying to do.
Nathaniel Philbrick also writes fiction. The problem is Philbrick is a plagiarist, con artist and liar. He steals other people's work on a massive scale that would embarrass Ambrose. As an historian, he is useless, just a thief. As a fiction novelist, he is not bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Apr 17, 2019 2:11:34 GMT -6
Up the Duff. I am having rather considerable difficulty comprehending his cookie policy. It's very, very, odd!
|
|
