If I could, I would give this book 3.5 stars, but what can you do? I feel like 3 is more fitting than 4.
First
off, I would say that my biggest gripe with the book is just the way
that it's written. Sometimes the writing is really good, and then it can
be flat out confusing at times. I liked how in the earlier and mid
sections of the book, that the author would segue into other pieces of
information, that overall help the reader understand more on the
background of the time period, family members, or general atmosphere
they were trying to portray. But I've noticed odd gramatical spacing,
wrong tenses of words used, or just general odd ways of saying things in
their book. Especially near the end, the book feels rushed, and it
seems like they were really just trying to get to final pages of the
book. Granted, I understand trying to finish the book sooner than
later...the entire thing is over 500 pages if you include the
bibliography and post script notes. In reality, the main story is only
400 pages.
What I really wish the author focused more on was the
psychology of Manson, more on his childhood and info from when he was
in the reform school, and the trials. While I realize that the book is
to be more of a Manson biography plus insight on the family, there were
some people that they just kind of fell off talking about. While it
stated that Beausoleil went to trial, it kind of just ends his parts of
the story there with him. The trials in general was a section that was
talked about pretty fast, in comparison to parts of the book that focus
over a 100 pages on the Family's way of life. To me, it would be just as
interesting to go over what the girls and Charley felt during the trial
phases, as it was to know that people ate out of the garbage (I guess
freegans are a 50+ year old concept). I've watched interviews where
Krenwinkel and Van Houten said they acted like the way they did during
the trials because they figured that they would die anyway. It would
have been nice to see that in the book. It always gets me how arrogant
everyone seemed in the trials. I guess the author's main focus was to
talk about the daily Family life, as opposed to the post murder
going-ons.
On the other hand, I do enjoy the book as a piece of
knowledge. It was really interesting at times to read how f'd up the
whole Family was. Incredibly sad how so many were fooled, and even more
were staunch in their beliefs. I can't gloss over the fact that Charlie,
and others engaged in pedophilia. But considering the Epstein stuff
lately, I guess I can't be surprised that the music biz breeds that
stuff. The insight of Manson's childhood was good, though as stated
before, I wish it was delved into more. The more I read about his
mentality as a whole, it really appeared that Charles has psychological
problems. I couldn't help but wonder if he was born in this time period,
if he would have been formally diagnosed with a behavior problem.
At
the end of the book, the author stated that people mostly remember
Manson because he lived past the murders. They said that no-one
remembers the names of Columbine teens because they killed themselves.
Not only is that a weird comparison, that is completely untrue. Everyone
remembers the names of Klebold and Harrison, more than anything just
because the tragic event happened 20 some years ago, as opposed to the
Tate murder's 50. Comparisons and general writing like this made the
story a bit of a drag to read. Others have stated it in their reviews
also, and the book has bad pacing at times. I completely agree, just
like my comments about the ending about. The ending is quick...but the
middle can take forever. And sometimes, the ending had paragraphs that
kind of didn't need to be there. It almost felt like a rookie's first
book or something.
In conclusion, I'd say that if you have a deep
interest in the Manson rabbit hole, this'd be a good book to read. If
you have a ton of prior knowledge about the Family before, I'd say that
it wouldn't hurt to skip parts. I'd imagine that any seasoned Family
interestees would be more curious about the childhood part than anything
else. If you only have a passing interest in this subject, this may not
be the book for you. It'd be way too long for anyone with a passing
glance.
I wouldn't re-read it again in entirety, but it's a good resource for making blog posts or something.
Also, I forgot to say that there seems to be conflicting evidence at times. Everywhere on the internet, it says that Terry Melcher wanted to make a documentary about the Manson Family, but in this book, it makes it seem like it was Gregg Jakobson's idea only. There are other times too, but conflicting ideas like this one makes the book a bit confusing at times.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/3003653805?book_show_action=false&from_review_page=1
No comments:
Post a Comment