whoopscareless

• Rated 4 stars

“Really enjoyable book that just slid by in a matter of hours. Has a lovely atmosphere to it, and though you know what's going to happen right from the beginning, it's a really good read.”

whoopscareless wrote this review Thursday, May 29 2008. ( reply | permalink )

• Rated 0 stars

“I think I'm missing something here, and I'm not sure if it's because I'm looking too hard for themes or because I'm stoopit. Tending towards the latter so will find some academic notes and try again at a later date. :)”

whoopscareless wrote this review Sunday, May 25 2008. ( reply | permalink )

• Rated 3 stars

“I do enjoy the stories, though half-way through the whole book I did start to find Holmes' manner completely infuriating. I loved the one partly set in Birmingham. So cute. :)”

whoopscareless wrote this review Thursday, April 17 2008. ( reply | permalink )

• Rated 3 stars

“A pretty good romp. But I really can't get on with Defoe's writing style. So many commas! Argh! It's Robinson Crusoe all over again!
”

whoopscareless wrote this review Thursday, April 17 2008. ( reply | permalink )

0 of 1 members found this review helpful.

• Rated 3 stars

“Nicely written but... bizarre choice of title and subject matter. Not Cicero himself... it's just that it covers Cicero's life up to the point that it becomes *really* interesting and then stops. As for the title, I think I'm just reading too much into it... I was thinking oh, the military sense of imperium... but no. It's just Cicero. And I don't particularly like the use of Tiro as narrator... apart from being a bit of a cheap tactic, he's given no personality, and is so repetitive (I invented shorthand! So, I wrote everything in shorthand! Everybody loved that I wrote in shorthand!). It's quite a good read (as in it's nicely written and paced), and it strings together all the stories differently, but like 'Pompeii', it sort of lacks depth.”

whoopscareless wrote this review Thursday, April 17 2008. ( reply | permalink )

• Rated 4 stars

“I absolutely devoured this book - had it at work as my lunchtime read and even at home I kept thinking about it and wanting to get back to reading it. I was so keen to follow the plot that I kept skipping bits of detail, for which I earned several slapped wrists. But it means that reading it again will be a real treat.”

whoopscareless wrote this review Thursday, February 28 2008. ( reply | permalink )

• Rated 4 stars

“Very nicely written book - initially thought the POV idea was a bit cheesy but was won over by the end. The last quarter was a bit hard to swallow in terms of the revelations, but I'm looking forward to reading it again. I think it'll be even better second time around.”

whoopscareless wrote this review Friday, February 22 2008. ( reply | permalink )

• Rated 3 stars

“Good, but hard-going. I force-read it over a 24 hour period (my dad's book, so had to read it before I returned to my place) and gave myself a migraine. Exactly the kind of verbose style I'd expected from Self's newspaper articles, but even more odd. Actually gets a 3.5.”

whoopscareless wrote this review Wednesday, November 28 2007. ( reply | permalink )

• Rated 4 stars

“I liked this a lot, particularly the way the threads of the story were woven through each other - and the timing was excellent. Just when you couldn't wait to hear more about the main story you'd get another bit. Also, it's given me an interest in Tudor history that I never had before. That's good work from a novel.”

whoopscareless wrote this review Wednesday, November 28 2007. ( reply | permalink )