Reviewer Emma Jacobs doesn’t waste any time or, for that matter, the first two sentences before telling us what she thinks:
Kelsey Timmerman’s investigation into the underbelly of globalisation is moronic. I am not being unkind.
My favorite part is how she begins one paragraph, “His ignorance is occasionally amusing.” (Wait, is that a compliment? Did I charm her with my ignorance?) And then begins another paragraph, “Ultimately his ignorance is maddening…” (Darn! I thought I had her.)
I expected bad reviews (maybe not to this extent) and I’ve received one. No big deal. I don’t expect to be the first author ever to not receive a far less than glowing review. However, I do think the review lacked in a few areas.
The facts being one of them…
She writes that I’m a self-proclaimed beach bum. That’s wrong. I write about bumping into a former classmate who was working at Wal-Mart before beginning my quest and how he called me a beach bum. A self-proclaimed beach bum, I’m not.
Ms. Jacobs is dazzled by my ignorance when I ask a “twenty something” (her words not mine) Bangladeshi woman if she knew Gandhi. The woman is not a “twenty something” woman; she is, in fact, UN Special Envoy/Former supermodel/designer/sixty-something Bibi Russell. Still, I’m somewhat ignorant thinking that Bibi may have met Gandhi (Bibi was born a decade after Gandhi’s death), but not so ignorant that I thought anyone in their twenties would have met him.
I checked and both of these facts are quite clear in the book.
And speaking of the Bibi Russell/Gandhi mix-up…that’s called self-deprecation. If a reviewer doesn’t like the book, I’d expect them to use examples other than the author’s self deprecations. That seems kind of lazy.
Bowels or no bowels, I’m happy to have been reviewed in the Financial Times.