There are many empty spaces that are not filled in, not be answered. Who is, at all this crazy Thomas, the people involved in talks to get their own life issues to the track? (As if people in gekidnapptem state would really open to it) alone already shouting into the wind, how seriously can you take such a story? As if Eggers here further wanted to try, wanted to risk an experiment, only we as readers are also willing to engage in such crazy Geprächsexperimente at all? This question should only be answered by the reader decide if he keeps by willing to become involved and to the end. For what at first so wrong-headed and naive, comes, gets more and more realistic and legitimate trains, although Thomas seems to act also a certain lack of perspective, serve their persons to be examined, dealing with the past. We guessed that it had something to do with drugs and alcohol, it can then be taken seriously? But latest when he goes his own strict teacher with former abusive situations to the court, you realize the man wants more, just - we can arrange it properly? How justified are his questions about responsibility and guilt? When it comes to questions of guilt? Eggers comes here a lot of, but really definitely it will be difficult to locate a common thread. And as different his interlocutors in their hijacked state are also ready to talk, so different that the talks are also run. But some coincidences are so easy to unrealistic as that they would so easily removed Eggers. Peak expected the call with the cop that be, who in all likelihood also shot his former guilt friend "Don Banh" .... a Vernahme, which is written as professionally, as if it were happening a courtroom ... written class. ...
But Eggers creates the real trick so that we move away from the resistance to his protagonist, in some understanding, and we no longer know as a reader, whether we should we now profess solidarity, and to that madman who increasingly legitimate views Questions laying on the table, with his back to the wall, the air leaves out so many interlocutors. Undoubtedly, Dave Eggers has made a great deal here. The language would not even be kept particularly demanding or literary. Not at all. There is no narrator, only a dialogue-seekers. And what at first seems already to tilt as universally valid nearly to disinterested, takes place in the concrete confrontation increasingly fascination with the truth, for the authentic, the honest. It meanders here formally the repulsive towards the unpredictable Lesesog. And perhaps anlässt to be impossible naive, finds his top form in revealing conversations that could be done any better from a legal or prosecutor. A book about child abuse, about unfulfilled career, unrequited love, but also about violence or the cover-up of proven evidence, where an innocent teenager comes to his life. The book title I find terribly selected next, even if it finds a match in the text book. One may probably have many objections to this book, but conversation depths that are touched upon here, then everything is just yet but superficial, even if that should initially come across as. A young Psycho (path) of us ordinary citizens once more holds up a mirror to still take us another reality in mind that you might have to leave once ran itself. Dave Eggers has accomplished here masterfully, even if it is probably the Circle to his final success likely Roman hardly come close ...
