A History of France, by John Julius Norwich

I’m so proud of this review, and I liked this book, so I’m just going to make today’s post a link to it.

Look! Book Review! Here!

The reason I’m proud of this review is that I think I nailed the tone that a reader who would like this book would like. It matches the book. And I also think I managed to give a sense of the scale of the book, which is the only thing I could think to do given that you can’t really talk about the argument or plot. I mean, the plot is history. So what would you say? “France. It happened.”

I really wish there was a class on how to write these.

I keep saying this, but I feel like we’ve gotten to a weird point in reading where a book has to be THE BEST BOOK EVER WRITTEN EVERYONE IS READING IT THIS IS THE ONLY BOOK WE SHALL TALK ABOUT in order to be “worth” reading. We don’t have that standard for television, and we don’t have it for movies…why should it be true for books? I think there are a lot of people championing all those books that are the greatest book, because usually, they’re pretty awesome books. And then there are books I champion that I personally think are the greatest book that didn’t get their day in the sun. (Like everything by Jonas Karlsson.) But I really want to be the person who puts the time in to review the other books; the ones that for most readers are going to be just so-so, but for a couple of readers are going to be exactly the book.

Anyway, I’m still trying to figure out how exactly to do that…and I think part of it is just going to be actually taking a few minutes to write reviews on Goodreads and other sites, because I already read really broadly, and quite a lot. I mean I do write reviews. Kind of. But usually I write kind of “from my perspective” reviews on Goodreads, and I think you’d have to know me to get much value out of them. It really sucks how fast a book’s publicity cycle ends. Luckily, the internet is forever. So maybe I’ll just start posting them here. I don’t know.