This is a political science book masquerading as a book of fiction. It goes on far longer than it should have, as well as includes far too many details, of which the author openly admits have no point. What about the red ribbon? Why are the characters so insipid? I gave up and kept pray for it to end, the last 2 chapters and the epilogue could have been excised completely and no one would have known. I fell for this book because I loved the Kurt Wallander books, but I think I'll skip Mankell after this. It may be a while before I can forgive him. Beginning the book from the viewpoint of a starving wolf who finds a murder victim was brilliant. Unfortunately, continuing to vary the viewpoints with such frequency was an unfortunate decision that prevents The Man from Beijing from what could have been a great novel. Changing the point of view from character to character and jumping in time and geographical location are both techniques that should be used to keep the reader's attention--and they do. However, doing it too often and between too many characters in too many different places prevents the reader from developing a connection with and investment in any one character, and consequently leaves them at a distance, observing the story rather than being "wrapped up" in it. Moreover, by letting us into the head of every major character, Mankell ruins almost all of his chances to create suspense. Without suspense, the already-emotionally-distanced reader has no real motivation to keep reading, except to see how the pieces all tie together. That at least is why I finished the novel, although I'll admit that I did little more than skim the last few pages.I have never read anything else by Mankell, but if this is an indication as to what his style is like, then I doubt I'll pursue his work any further.
What do You think about O Homem De Beijing (2008)?
Typical Mankell, solid characters, excellent story telling.
—shirosakura
