Negative Positive
Title: Quite a bit less editorializing would have been nice
Review: I guess I need to look a little closer at what I'm looking to check out in the future when it comes to non-fiction, as this was aimed just a LITTLE bit below my comprehension.The biggest issue with the book is that rather than presenting the facts of the various matters in a strictly historical context the author makes sure to point out how each of the individuals that had been involved in the various hoaxes - unwittingly or not - was either 1) a Snidely Whiplash-esque villain, twisting his or her mustache as the marks fell for the con, or 2) a grade a moron.In theory it wouldn't be a bad primer for this sort of thing, but you could easily glean more information from Wikipedia about each of the cases in question.
Is the review positive or negative? 