We used this book for ninth grade biology because it was recommended in “The Well-Trained Mind.” It is a good start, but it is not enough work to earn a full high school science credit. And you will definitely need to add labs to make it a laboratory course. But we were happy with the book and it worked well for us with a bit of tweaking.
3/5
I found this book on the “for sale” shelf at my library and bought it because Joe McGinniss wrote it, not because I was familiar with the case of the “Milkshake Murderer.” Once you adapt to his writing style, it’s a quick read.
There’s not a lot of fluff here — it’s fast paced and sticks to the facts — even though it’s obvious which “side” McGinniss is on right from the start. So if you’re looking for a “fair and balanced” look at the case, you aren’t going to find it here, and I’m not sure it could even be done, the crime being so heinous and bizarre! According to McGinnis, Rob Kissel was just a great guy — ambitious and driven, yes, but he loved his family. And then there’s Nancy — lousy wife and lousy mother and just plain evil, or stupid, or both.
It *is* impossible to feel sorry for Nancy Kissel, or find any redeeming qualities whatsoever, reading this book. But on the other hand, was Rob Kissel nothing but Mr. Wonderful? I don’t believe, not for a minute, the allegations that Nancy made as part of her defense. But I also can’t believe *any* relationship could really be that one-sided.
McGinnis recounts in great detail Nancy’s actions in the week after Rob was murdered, and this was, I think, my favorite part of the book simply because you just can’t make this stuff up! Shaking my head the whole time, thinking, “You have *got* to be kidding!”
McGinnis goes to great lengths to hammer home the point that these people were absolutely rolling in disgusting amounts of money, and that got a bit tiresome after awhile. I found myself thinking, “Okay! Okay! They’re rich! I get it!” But it all goes with the title “Never Enough” — and not just for Rob and Nancy. Some of the other members of Rob’s family were willing to go to great lengths to support a lifestyle that was built on a house of cards.
3/5
I’m not going to say I don’t recommend this book, because it might not have gotten a fair go. This is my fourth Tudor-era book in a row, and maybe I’m just burnt out. Perhaps I would have preferred this book if I had read it first, rather than last.
The blurbs about this book state that Warnicke sets forth a new and controversial reinterpretation of the rise and fall of Anne Boleyn and focuses on sexual intrigues and family politics.
Maybe I just wasn’t up to the challenge, but I was kind of disappointed. I thought it *was* going to be a new and controversial reinterpretation, but I didn’t get that impression at all, unless by “reinterpretation” she means that she discredits or relies on sources differently than Ives and Weir do.
For instance, all three authors rank the credibility of the Imperial Ambassador, Eustace Chapuys differently, depending on what he is reporting at the time. I would think this is to be expected and don’t see anything “new” or “controversial” about it.
By the time we got to the fall and execution of the Queen, I was pretty much worn out and became bored with her discussion about how the whole thing was due to Anne’s delivery of a deformed fetus in January 1536. The rest of her argument regarding the charges against Anne is completely dependent on this one singular event. If the baby was not deformed, then the rest of her argument fails.
It seemed to me that sources she had been discrediting throughout the book were now considered authoritative and accurate when it came to this issue. I am certainly no expert on this historical period — just eternally fascinated — but she seemed to be digging pretty deep to come up with facts to support her conclusion.
I had considered that I should read the book again more carefully to see what I had missed, but when I finished it and realized I was relieved to be done with it, I decided against a re-read. I also know that she has written some follow-up articles about her conclusions in this book, and I would have liked to read those, but I was unable to access those publications at a reasonable cost.
But, as I said, I cannot say that I wouldn’t recommend the book. These four books — two by Ives, one by Weir and then this one by Warnicke — are definitely not summer beach books. You really have to pay attention to follow the arguments, and it’s a lot of work. So if I would recommend anything, it would be to separate these with a few along the lines of “Twilight” or “Charlotte’s Web” rather than trying to read them one after the other.
4/5