Negative Positive
Title: Unbalanced and unedifying
Review: I came to this book prepared to enjoy it both because of Schom's writing style and because I am not a fan of Napoleon, sharing Schom's opinion that he was a crazy little psychopath. Nevertheless, I was quite disappointed in this book. It's not just that Schom is so very hostile to Napoleon; it's that he finds absolutely NOTHING redeeming but nevertheless makes no attempt to explain why, if this is so, Napoleon could accomplish what he did. Schom merely announces events without any analysis of why.I would not have been disappointed if Schom had given us a simple narrative history and left the analysis to the reader. I similarly would not be disappointed in a hostile attack on the emperor if I hadn't been left with the clear perception that there MUST be much that is missing. Schom can't have it both ways.
Is the review positive or negative? 