I just finished the "invisible wall" and I'm not quite agree with the general enthusiasm It's Mankell, the pretty good, but not excellent. At first I found it actually tons from the beginning, and if we were not already addicted, maybe we would flee both - first three chapters frankly depressive. Then, while the form of the novel borrows (I had typed "fingerprint" ...) the form of questioning which is the logical intellectual journey of investigator (depressive Wallander) is still too hungry in epilogue. Some items that are constantly reminded, interrogated, elements of mystery, are simply evacuated. It was the postscript: We will not know, and it does not matter, it's like that in life, we can not know everything. It's like that in life, but Mankell had accustomed us to more rigorous construction. So disappointment compared to other of his novels (especially dogs of Riga or St John of the Dead or ....) And then Mankell takes a direction relatively "esoteric". The distance from the land of polar scannien to approach the great thrillers ... International networks, foreign killers ... already observed in the White Lioness. That apart, I keep my admiration. A lot of talent for him, fun for me. An aid application to conclude: Could someone finally give me the exact order of publication of the adventures of Wallander? The French publisher has released translations in the greatest disorder. Happy reading.
