Title: Not A Book, A Monograph
Product review: This is a history of a "still-born" railroad project in Missouri. The project was never built and the author explores the reasons why the original concept was never developed. The line was originally intended to extend north of the Missouri River, but there is little information about this in the document. Also, the document lacks maps which could have been used to illustrate the builder's concepts, and the existence of rival or competing rail lines. Also largely unmentioned is the political atmosphere in Missouri at the time of the 1870's and 1880's, including passage of a statewide Constitution the forbade governmental entities from getting directly involved in the financing of railroads.This document is also a monograph, similar to the type of document a college student would turn in as a research paper for an upper level history class. The document is not a book. Listing it as a book seems misleading to this reviewer.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
