![]() ![]() ![]() Unless a reader is only looking to be informed in a general way about what he is reading, it is the argumentative flow that keeps him/her engaged. Why would an articulate historian write such a well-researched book that summarises 1000s of years of history, without having an overarching theme to be supported by all that effort? Most of the popular expansive history books (think Sapiens, think GGS, etc.) are actually organised around powerful central themes that allow the reader to engage with the history being told - to have solid reasons to stay engaged with it. It is strange to read such an expansive history book and realise there is no real theme to the book. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |