There in the comments and a single negative review without the words, it contains its share of true. For the three protagonists of the story is not the most "horrible" one lon believes, all the more that this story is to be cropped in the context of the time, from November 1932 to March 1934.
We first Martin leaving gradually the surrounding ideals destroy his own ideas. In its letter of 10 December 1932, he said dHindenburg "a great liberal than many jadmire" and in its letter of 18 August 1933, "he Is nothing more futile quun liberal? ". All that constituted its values sen went to adopt those of the majority. Where it appears almost Machiavellian, this is WHEN IT describes what happened to Griselle. Even colder quun forensic report; any emotion for that little time ago he had deeply cherished.
Then comes Griselle, touching at first by his whole feelings, and gradually discovers as wanting only to satisfy his ambition, his fame and his ego. For Cella, she takes risks "stupid" (according to Martin) and can not help but make a child provocation that will cost him very dear.
Max, finally, so good, so kind, so "humanist" confesses shamelessly abusing and quietly steal his "family" to daugmenter its turnover. The bait of gain it is such a strong engine nest that he not embarrassed by what sapparente to lescroquerie. It saddens us and moves us by his fear and sorrow and in this, we follow. But where it becomes despicable, this is where to avenge Griselle that it will implement a Machiavellian plan which he knows that he will destroy Martin but also his family. From this point of view, Max is monstrous and poses an essential question on forgiveness and revenge.
A small book, yes, but that does not leave insensitive and lon continues once read the last word.
