procedures and litigation |
Aftersleep Books
|
||||||||||||||||||
Celia A SlaveThe following report compares books using the SERCount Rating (base on the result count from the search engine). |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Aftersleep Books - 2005-06-20 07:00:00 | © Copyright 2004 - www.aftersleep.com () | sitemap | top |
The problem that human corruption still rampages every bit as unchecked through our current country is not addressed, but rather, the book dwells almost solely on the single incident in question.
I've told you that this story, unlike some stories, deserves to be told, and deserves to be heard. What's truly sad is how the writing style in this book will prevent so many people from actually reading it.
The front cover of the book loudly announces that it is "based on a true story." In fact, it's not "based" on anything. It IS a true story. I define the difference in this way; a story BASED on a true story will sometimes embellish or at least phrase the text in the form of a narrative, for the purpose of providing a single, connected tale that can be followed and appreciated by a casual reader. I read this book because my little brother was assigned it for school reading, and if I had not felt compelled to finish by such a personal motive, I would have dropped it before finishing chapter 1.
Too often in this story, we are told "Celia may have done this," or "evidence supports this belief" or "This may have happened, but we can't prove it," like a crumby history textbook. Still more destructive to this volume is the fact that every two paragraphs or so, the main topic of the novel (Celia, her trial, etc...) is interrupted for a series of incidental and largely irrelivent facts about slavery and the political processes that went into the governments/courts of the time.
Furthermore, on the back of the book, it claims to "produce the kind of anger that never goes away." My anger was principally with the unfeeling tones set by the writer, who would consistently narrate the horrors of the situation as though he were a person virtually impartial to what he was telling us about. The relating of such horrors without seeming the least bit disgusted by them made the writer seem, in my mind, just as odious a creature as any of the people he described, (and didn't describe very well, leaving out, again, like a history text, all things of narrative import, like mood, personality, appearance and so forth.)
Maybe the next time a truly important story of this sort is released, it will be done in a manner that will welcome the casual reader, instead of being something that only a dedicated historian can enjoy.