It's not fair of the reader to judge a book for it's failure to match their high hopes but, I think it's a little fair if the writer contributes in the creation of the reader's expectations. Anthony Good writes well, he builds a sharp, bullet-proof narrative but the outcome of all his efforts was quite disappointing. Now, if you've read the book yourself, you might tell me that was the whole point of it. And it may very well be but, I think ending the book with your reader feeling disappointed is a risk that is not without consequence.
Kill Redacted is written like a journal, it can end whenever the journalist feels compelled to end it. No reason is owed to the reader. It's guided by the journalist's memory and their whims and wherever their thoughts lead. Michael, a former headmaster, is the narrator and journalist. He writes, often distractedly, and on the whole a little arrogantly - fully aware that he guides the story, and is the puppeteer in how it’s told and when. The reader is privy to his thoughts, those that aren't written as well, and we follow his lengthy journey, battling reason against conscience and morality, until its ultimate outcome. Once we reach that, it is the end. Too quick in contrast to what came before, abrupt. When the pages were beginning to tick down, I felt sure that Michael's ideal ending would not have come to fruition. Indeed, I think that would have been the more interesting story: the mastermind forced to relinquish his calm and quiet madness and, all illusion of, control.
The characters and writing was solid, and so I'm inclined to recommend the book. It was certainly a fascinating portrayal into the mind of the ordinary man conspiring to do something catastrophic and so seemingly contrary to his character. In these fraught political times, I do recommend this read.
I received this book from the publishers, for review consideration. All opinions are honest aand completely my own.
Kill Redacted is written like a journal, it can end whenever the journalist feels compelled to end it. No reason is owed to the reader. It's guided by the journalist's memory and their whims and wherever their thoughts lead. Michael, a former headmaster, is the narrator and journalist. He writes, often distractedly, and on the whole a little arrogantly - fully aware that he guides the story, and is the puppeteer in how it’s told and when. The reader is privy to his thoughts, those that aren't written as well, and we follow his lengthy journey, battling reason against conscience and morality, until its ultimate outcome. Once we reach that, it is the end. Too quick in contrast to what came before, abrupt. When the pages were beginning to tick down, I felt sure that Michael's ideal ending would not have come to fruition. Indeed, I think that would have been the more interesting story: the mastermind forced to relinquish his calm and quiet madness and, all illusion of, control.
The characters and writing was solid, and so I'm inclined to recommend the book. It was certainly a fascinating portrayal into the mind of the ordinary man conspiring to do something catastrophic and so seemingly contrary to his character. In these fraught political times, I do recommend this read.
I received this book from the publishers, for review consideration. All opinions are honest aand completely my own.