6 of 30 people found the following review helpful
Retraction, apology and substantial damages...,
This review is from: All Dressed Up: The Sixties and the Counterculture (Paperback)
Caroline Coon successfully challenged the tabloid guesswork relating to Release in this book. Wild bargepoles wouldn't get me to read one word of it, let alone buy the dog.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-7 of 7 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 23 Jun 2008 22:46:28 BDT
Derek Longstaff says:
If you haven't read it how can you dismiss it. I've read it and you know what? It's a pretty good read. I can't think of many other books about the 60s counter culture that offer this much insight into the period and times.
In reply to an earlier post on 6 Jul 2010 17:01:30 BDT
Quite. What an extraordinary notion
In reply to an earlier post on 28 Dec 2010 12:30:38 GMT
When a writer includes material that is clearly wrong, presumably for sensational reasons, apparently without checking, I imagine the result may well be "a good read". But how much is accurate? How much is gossip? Must we second-guess the "research" so we know what we can trust? I would say wrong information is worse than missing information, it seeps into oral history and it has no place in a work of supposed historical record. I rated this book 1 star (after researching its chequered past) because I cannot trust its contents. That is how I can dismiss it.
In reply to an earlier post on 28 Dec 2010 12:31:33 GMT
Dilberto, don't you find it extraordinary that people care so little for facts in a book which is ostensibly non-fiction?
In reply to an earlier post on 16 Dec 2011 16:18:06 GMT
I. Stuart says:
I'm very interested in your comments (and have read your other reviews and respect your opinions) . All I would suggest is that while there may be the odd mistake (I am not aware of the Caroline Coon objections) essential this feels like an honest and serious account of the period by someone who was there. It is a good read but not in a sensationalist way - rather it is a serious historical text. I would urge you to read it - you may not agree with all his conclusions (I know I didn't) , but it is a very useful book.
In reply to an earlier post on 7 Feb 2012 09:07:30 GMT
Since you ask I find substantially more extraordinary that you would decide (on the basis of one anecdote among hundreds being challenged) not to touch still less read a book and yet still feel sufficiently confident to pick a fight with people who have read the book and who - one really ought to assume - have the interest, maturity and intelligence to decide for themselves what they think about its contents.
In reply to an earlier post on 7 Feb 2012 16:30:45 GMT
Dilberto... It is hardly "picking a fight" to give one's opinion here-that is what reviews and comments are for. It seems logical to me that a work which originally defamed one of its subjects (something that was easy to check) was poorly researched. You are entitled to take the opposite view. You are also entitled to view people who agree with your views positively and those who disagree negatively. There are many books about this era-I merely set a certain standard for the ones I take the time to read.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›