Title: Could have used an editor
Product review: While the topic is fascinating, and his use of primary sources (especially the Boston media) is laudable, the writing itself is occasionally brutal. It reads like a first draft. He repeats stories multiple times, and makes assertions that he does not back up. I agree with his thesis and his conclusions for the most part, but he dismisses evidence that doesn't fit his view, and he doesn't really try very hard to determine motives. I was hoping for a "smoking gun" in the long debate about who (probably plural) amongst Cronin, Yawkey and Higgins is responsible for this black mark in Red Sox history. Its mainly just he-said, she-said. If you are interested in the topic, as I am, I recommend the book. There are a lot of interesting stories and first-hand accounts. But you might have to cringe a few times while you are reading.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
