Dogpiss in the Glimmerlight
The pensive reader slowly turned the crisp pages of his virgin untouched book and though apprehensive he presently found the word writing of the storyman overloaded with all the worst in the books he knew he was too smart to read. Upfalling from his warm cocoon he slowly ambled to the computing machine to make his tumultuous thoughts heard.
92% of people liked this book.
I honestly have no idea why. Were 91% of the people reading it unaware of other books? Books with punctuation and sensible ratios of nouns to adjectives? I got this book, as I expect many, or indeed most, of the others who own it did, because I'm a fan of Chris Packham. I used to watch The Really Wild Show as a kid and I've enjoyed Springwatch et al as an adult. I struggle to see how anyone in the same position as me (i.e. most of the target audience) could possibly enjoy this.
The writing is atrocious. There are compound words galore, often made up by the author. That's not always a bad thing, with a deft touch it's something that can add a lot to a book. It's not adding anything here though other than moments of unintentional hilarity. I was reading some of the book out loud so I wasn't the only one suffering, and it took me several minutes to get through the first sentence of one early chapter, because it began with the word "Upfalling" and I couldn't stop laughing.
Who edited this book? Do they speak English and read other books? It's a stupid and facetious question, clearly nobody edited this book, it's a rank and steamy mess of adjectives and adverbs with no substance. Well, that's not true, there's some small substance there in the story of how the author (I think it was the author, I'm not certain) stole a baby kestrel from its nest and took it home to keep. That wasn't really the substance I was looking for though, on the face of it that's pretty horrific and the airy fairy waffle surrounding it doesn't exactly put it in any kind of context to alleviate the sense of a dirty sort of PETA-baiting larceny.
This is an autobiography. An alleged autobiography. It is written almost entirely in the third person. Think for a moment, if you will; have you ever read an autobiography written in the third person? No, you haven't, because it's an outrageously obnoxious way to write an autobiography. I have no doubt it's some sort of commentary on his autism and maybe it's even explained, I didn't get far enough to find that out, but it's still obnoxious. Just because there's a reason for you making your book annoying to read doesn't mean it's not annoying to read.
It's not even just written in the third person, much of it is from the imagined point of view of the people around the author. Did he have that level of insight into the life of the guy who drives the ice cream van? No, it's a stupid device to make boring non-events into tortuously long passages where nothing happens other than several things are overly described, and then ignored forever.
What is the point of anything in this book? I have no idea what it's trying to do or say. I'm quite sure this was only published because it's Chris Packham - people like him so they will buy the book. It's had something of the opposite effect on me though, while I still bought the book I now don't think I could watch Chris Packham on TV. I couldn't take him seriously knowing the words he wrote down and sent out for everyone to read and say "yes, this is what Chris Packham is like".
He sat back snug and satisfied knowing now that the whirling thoughts and unfamiliar feelings were securely pinned down in the glowing white aurora of his goodreads page and upfalling from his chair he silently crept back through to his waiting bedroom.