Reading Is Quicker Than Writing?
Monday, October 6th, 2008Well, of course it isn’t, but it may as well be.
I’ve just realised that I have read about a dozen books since I last updated my blog. That’s a lot of writing to do if I’m going to comment on them all.
And that’s where this title comes from. It seems that I find reading pretty easy. One of the books that I read goes over 500 pages, yet it was polished off in about three days.
Yet I’ll be damned if I can write about all these books. It seems to me that I don’t have time. The illusion is that reading seems to be less consumptive of my time than writing about the books would be. Utter trash, of course, but that’s how it feels.
To get around the problem, I thought I’d write about the books in a single post, add a comment, and that could be it.
I’ll write about them in order of preference, seeing as it would be unfortunate to put potential readers off by inflicting on them a line on the dull book that is Waterloo, by Andrew Uffindell and Michael Corum.
So, here I, eventually, go …







The story is set in 1960s Germany. A news reporter happens to be on the scene when the body of a suicidee is discovered. A local policeman gives the reporter a diary in case he’d like a couple of details about the man for the report. It’s with this diary that the plot starts: The man is a survivor of a concentration camp in Riga, and documents the sadism of the commandant who, among other things, made the man put his own wife in a mobile gas unit.


