Negative Positive
Title: god-awful writing
Review: Aside from all the logical, scientific and historical convolutions, which have been exhaustively noted by other reviewers, little is said about Diamond's writing style. He has a terrible command of the English language; he is repetitive and academically dishonest and inauthentic. I cannot really determine the reason this book made all the fuss that it did. What's worse is that this book gives people a sense that they learned something or that Diamond proved something when all he has done is poorly synthesized others' works without citing them, or made things up in a heap of dreadful language. Do not waste your time.
Is the review positive or negative? 