Title: May not be the worst book I ever read
Product review: Hmmm . . . How can a complete unaltered version of a book originally published in 1979 contain references to events occurring in 1993? The only thing that made me believe that this book could have been originally written in 1979 or earlier was lack of use by the author of cut-n-paste technology, resulting in character development scattered in the strangest and most inappropriate places. I agree that it wasn't altered - and should have been. Why give it two stars? Because I saved one star in case I come across a book worse than this one.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
