Top critical review
32 people found this helpful
Full Disclosure: I haven't read this
on 15 July 2013
As above, I have not read this book. This is, however, a review of the awful and damaging con that JK Rowling has inflicted on the writing world.
I won't claim that her 'secret being revealed' was an intentional publicity stunt to increase sales. I can't prove that, though I have to be suspicious how Amazon (and other distributors) just so happened to have enough stock of a book by an unknown author to satisfy the overwhelming demand generated by the 'revelation' of the true author.
No, my disgust at this course of events is how JK Rowling constructed her author's bio, as detailed above in the 'about the author section. In case you don't want to scroll up, here is an abridged version:
'After several years with the Royal Military Police, he was attached to the SIB (Special Investigation Branch), the plain-clothes branch of the RMP. He left the military in 2003 and has been working since then in the civilian security industry. The idea for protagonist Cormoran Strike grew directly out of his own experiences and those of his military friends who have returned to the civilian world'
I find it more than permissible for Rowling to use a pseudonym. Why shouldn't she see how her work would perform without her celebrity-status attachment to it? All fine.
BUT, there was no need for her to create a pseudonym identity that claimed to have deep and involved experience of the themes and situations that the book pertains to. At this point, the use of the false identity transcends from simply being harmless to being downright offensive to those authors that do write from genuine experience and amounts to flagrant false advertising. Those that have picked up or do pick up this book not knowing the true author's identity will be expecting to read a thorough and detailed narrative containing elements drawn from true life experience and therefore legitimate in context and detail even if false in content (it is fiction after all). Had she simply left her pseudonym as a name and a generic 'married with kids' bio (as many authors do) then I wouldn't feel so deeply aggreived, but what Rowling has done is simply deplorable. She has artificially, and needlessly, lied about her credibility in producing this novel and we, as a consumer base, really really shouldn't reward this underhanded trickery with sky-high sales.
Don't buy this, I won't. I may borrow as I am a genuine fan of her past work but please do not credit this dishonesty with your hard-earned money.
EDIT: I have adjusted my review to three-stars to hopefully strike a fair balance between my respect for the content of the book and my disdain for the manner in which she chose to publish it. As I have stated many times in the comments attached to this review, I firmly and fundamentally believe the ethics employed by any purveyor of goods should be a factor when making a purchasing decision. Though many will (and, so far, have) criticised me for 'reviewing' this product without having read it, please take a moment to assess my principles before condemning me for your perceived 'misuse' of the review system. If a 'review', by definition, should contain information pertinent to informing a purchase then I firmly believe my contribution stands, at least in part, as a fair and justified 'review' of this product.