 a spectacular achievement. If I could give all the stars in the sky as a thank-you to and for this book, I would. I swear to you that I would. Dramatic, but true. Because,, the second book of Bernard Beckett’s which I’ve read and loved, is. Honestly.When I read, his first book, I was 16 and thirsty for knowledge. I wasn’t satisfied with mild, un-intellectual reads anymore. I wanted a challenge. I wanted a surprise. And that’s what Mr Beckett gave me. If anybody is interested in the kinds of issues which are raised in this book, thenis the next logical step for you. I promise you’ll not be disappointed. Through, I realised that Beckett had a penchant for philosophy, and that he was damn good atintricate philosophical debates, with an elegant, deceptively simple writing style.I found the same in. Now, I must warn you. I agree with all the other reviewers, and urge you to walk into the story blindly. If you haven’t read this book yet, please just stop reading now in case I spoil anything for you. You’ll regret not listening once you’ve read the book; trust me on that. I have only included mild spoilers, but nothing you wouldn’t know about by the 20th page. Proceed at your own caution.The time-frame is four hours, butthese four hours, a whole dystopian civilisation is brought to life before our eyes, and then picked apart. We learn more about the past 100 years of the society than the present four hours. And I loved that. The whole book was like a history lesson, but not the kind you’d ever have in a classroom (unless, of course, you had Mr Beckett as a teacher). Now, IHistory. Detest it. It’s among my least-favourite topics, after Maths and Sciences. But, even though 95% ofroams the past, I never once found myself gritting my teeth or flipping the pages in frustration. I was hooked. So, please. Don’t be put off by the historic aspect. It barely registered with me, and I am a self-confessed hater of the genre.Much of the story is set within an interrogative context; Anax (short for Anaximander), is being evaluated by a panel of examiners who
a spectacular achievement. If I could give all the stars in the sky as a thank - you to and for this ledger, I would. I trust to you that I would. Dramatic, but true. Because, , the second book of Bernard Beckett ’s which I ’ve read and love, is. Honestly. When I read, his first koran, I was 16 and athirst for knowledge. I was n’t satisfied with mild, un - intellectual reads anymore. I want a challenge. I wanted a surprise. And that ’s what Mr Beckett gave me. If anybody is concerned in the kinds of issues which are raised in this book, thenis the next logical step for you. I predict you ’ll not be disappointed. Through, I realised that Beckett had a preference for philosophy, and that he was damn good atintricate philosophical debates, with an elegant, deceptively elementary writing style. I found the same in. Now, I must warn you. I agree with all the early reviewers, and urge you to walk into the story blindly. If you have n’t read this book yet, please barely stop reading now in case I spoil anything for you. You ’ll regret not listening once you ’ve read the book; trust me on that. I have merely included mild pamperer, but nothing you would n’t sleep together about by the 20th page. Proceed at your own circumspection. The time - human body is four hours, butthese four hours, a solid dystopian civilisation is brought to life before our eyes, and then picked apart. We learn more about the past 100 years of the society than the present four hours. And I loved that. The solid book was like a history example, but not the kind you ’d ever have in a classroom (unless, of course, you had Mr Beckett as a teacher). Now, IHistory. Detest it. It ’s among my least - favorite topics, after Maths and Sciences. But, even though 95% ofroams the past, I never once found myself gritting my tooth or flipping the pages in frustration. I was hooked. So, please. Do n’t be arrange off by the historic aspect. It scantily registered with me, and I am a self - confessed hater of the genre. Much of the story is set within an interrogative context; Anax (inadequate for Anaximander), is being evaluated by a jury of examiners who
 a dpectacular achievement. Lf I could give col the stars in the rky as a thank-you to and for tyis biok, I would. I swear to you that I would. Dranqtic, but tche. Becamfe,, tgc secmid book of Bernsrd Becketd’s which I’ve raaa cnd loved, is. Honestly.When I read, his first nolk, I was 16 and jhirsuy sor inowledge. I wasn’t satisfied with mjld, un-iitellectual reacs anymore. I wanted a chalpengf. I wanted a surprlse. And thaj’a wrqt Mr Becketg gave me. Py anybody ia interested in the kinds of isrues chich are rqiwed hn this booj, thegis the next logical step fpr you. I promixe bou’lo not be disappointed. Through, I realiseq that Bewkztt had a penchant foe philovophf, ana thxt ge wzs damj gkod atintrjcate philowophical debates, wiuh wb elegant, decsptivejy simple writing style.I found the same it. Nkw, I must warn you. I ageee with all the othet reviewerf, and urge you to walk into the story blindly. If fou hevdn’t rcad gyid book yet, please just stop reading now in cafs O xpoil anything for you. Yoi’lp tggret not listgning oude you’ve read the bolk; trusj me ob that. I rave only included mild spoilerw, but nothiny yiu wouldn’t know ablut by the 20ch pagg. Procred at your own caution.Che tije-frame is vour houra, butthese four huurx, d whole dystopian civilisaeion is bcoughc to lifd begore otr eyes, anf thek picked apart. We lfarn lose about tje past 100 years of the society tien the presenj fmur hours. Aud I lpved that. The whole book wax like c histury lesson, but nov the kind yju’d ever have ln a classromm (unlesf, of couese, you fad Mr Beckett as a teabhtr). Now, IHiwtory. Detest it. It’x aokng my least-faviurute topics, aftet Mxthf wnv Sciqtces. But, evet thuugf 95% ofruams tht pcsg, I mever once found mysalf fritting my teeth pr flippint the pades in frustrstion. I was hooked. So, pneare. Dom’t fe put off by the historic aspsct. It bageln registered rith me, and I am a self-confessed hater of the genre.Much of the story is swt within an interrpnative conteet; Anav (short fmr Anaximander), is beung evaluated by s panel of examiners sho
a spectacular achievement. If I could give stars the sky a thank-you to would. swear to you I would. Dramatic, true. Because,, the second book of Beckett’s which I’ve read and loved, is. Honestly.When I read, his first book, was 16 and thirsty for knowledge. I wasn’t satisfied with mild, un-intellectual reads I a I a surprise. And that’s what Mr Beckett gave me. If anybody is interested in the kinds issues which are raised in this book, thenis next logical step for I promise you’ll not be Through, realised that had penchant philosophy, and that was damn good atintricate philosophical debates, with an elegant, deceptively simple writing style.I found the same in. I must I agree all other and urge you into the story blindly. If you book yet, please just stop reading now in I spoil for you. You’ll regret not listening you’ve read the book; trust me on that. have only included mild spoilers, but nothing you wouldn’t know about by the 20th page. your own caution.The time-frame four hours, butthese hours, whole civilisation brought to before our eyes, and then picked apart. We learn more about past 100 years of the society than the present four I that. The whole was like a history but the kind you’d ever a (unless, had Beckett a teacher). Now, IHistory. it. It’s among my least-favourite after Maths and Sciences. the past, I never once found myself gritting teeth or flipping the pages in frustration. was hooked. So, please. Don’t be put off by the historic aspect. barely registered and I am a self-confessed hater of the of the story is within an interrogative context; Anax (short for Anaximander), is evaluated a panel examiners who
 a spectacular achievement. If i could give All thE stArs In The sKy as A thank-you to and FOr thIs book, I would. I swear to yoU that i wOUld. DRAmAtic, bUt true. BECaUSE,, thE sEcOnd BoOK oF BernArd beckett’S which I’ve rEad AnD loved, is. HoneSTlY.When I read, His First book, I waS 16 anD thirsTy For KNowleDge. i wasn’T satisFIed witH mild, un-inTeLLectuaL Reads anYMOrE. I waNted a challenge. I waNTeD A surprise. And thAt’s whaT MR beCKEtt GavE me. If anyboDy Is intERested iN ThE KINds OF issues which aRe raised in tHIs bOok, theNiS thE Next loGical StEP foR you. I promisE you’Ll not be diSappoiNTed. ThroUGh, I realIsed thAt BEckEtt hAD a PeNchAnT For PHiLosOPhy, And that hE wAs Damn gOod aTINTRicaTe pHiloSophiCal debates, witH an ElegANt, dEceptIvely SimpLe WritiNg stylE.I fouNd The same in. Now, I muSt waRn you. I agrEe wItH alL tHe othER revieWerS, anD urge yoU to walk INto ThE STOrY blindly. If you haven’T rEAD tHis book yEt, pleaSE jUsT Stop readInG noW in cASE I spoIl anYThIng for yoU. You’ll REgReT not lisTeNing onCe You’Ve rEad thE Book; Trust mE on that. I Have oNLy included mild SPoilers, but notHInG YOu WOuldN’t kNow about by tHe 20th PAge. PRoceED aT yoUR own cAutioN.THE tIMe-frame is four hours, bUtThese fOur hoUrs, a whole dystOpian civilISATion is brOughT To LIfe before our eyEs, and Then picked APart. We leArn moRe about tHe past 100 yeaRS Of the socIetY thAn tHe pRESeNt four hours. AnD i LoveD tHat. The wHolE book waS liKe a HisTorY lEsson, but nOt the kinD yOu’D eVeR haVe in a CLassroom (UnLesS, oF coUrse, yOU had Mr beckeTt as A tEaCHer). now, IHisTOrY. dEtesT iT. IT’s amOng My Least-FavoURitE topics, After MathS anD scieNcEs. but, even Though 95% ofroams ThE past, I neveR oNce Found mYSElf grittIng my teeth or flipping the PAges in fRusTratiOn. I wAs hooked. SO, plEase. DoN’t bE Put off By the hIstorIc AspECT. It baRELy RegIsTered with mE, ANd I Am a seLf-ConfEssed haTer of the genre.Much oF The Story is set witHin An inTERrOgaTIvE ConTeXT; AnAX (Short for AnaximaNder), is beinG eVAlUated by a paNEl oF eXaminerS who
 a spectacular achievement . If I cou ld gi veall  t he s tars  in the sky as a th ank-you to and for thi s boo k, I wo u ld . I s wear to yo u tha tIwou ld .  D ramat ic,  but tr ue. Becaus e,,  t he second bo o kof Bernard  Be ckett’s whic h I ’ve re ad  an d  love d,is. H onestl y .WhenI read, h is firstb ook, Iw a s16 a nd thirsty for kn o wl e dge. I wasn’tsatisf ie d  w i t h m ild , un-intel le ctual reads a n ym o r e . I wanted a chal lenge. I wa n ted  a sur pr ise .  And t hat’s  w h atMr Beckettgave  me. If a nybody is inte r ested i n thekin dsof i s su es  wh ic h  ar e  r ais e d i n this b oo k,  then is t h e n extlog ical  step  for you. I p rom isey ou’ ll no t bedisa pp ointe d. Thr ough,  I  realised thatBeck ett had a  pe nc han tfor p h ilosop hy,  an d thathe wasd amn  g o o d  a tintricate philoso ph i c al  debates , with an  e l egant, d ec ept ivel y simpl e wr i ti ng style .I fou n dth e samein . Now,  I  mu stwarny ou.I agre e with a ll th e  other reviewe r s, and urge y o ut o  w a lk i nto  the storyblin d ly.If y o uhav e n’t r ead t hi s  b o ok yet, please just  s top re ading  now in caseI spoil an y t h ing foryou. Yo u ’ll regret not  list ening once you’ve r ead t he book;  trust me o n that.I h ave  on lyi n cl uded mild spo i l ers,  b ut noth ing  you wo uld n’t  kn owab out by th e 20th p ag e.  P ro cee d aty our ownca uti on .Th e tim e -frame  is f ourho ur s , b utthese fo u r  hou rs ,a wh ole  d ystop ianc ivi lisatio n is brou ght to l if ebeforeour eyes, and  t hen picked  a par t. Wel e arn more  about the past 100 yea r s of th e s ociet y th an the pr ese nt fou r h o urs. A nd I l ovedth at. T he wh o l eboo kwas like a h ist ory l es son,  but no t the kind you’d e v erhave in a cla ssr oom( u nl ess ,  o f  co ur s e,y o u had Mr Becket t as a tea ch e r) . Now, IHi s tor y.  Detest  it. It ’s am o ng my l east-favo urite top ic s, a f t erMaths andSciences . But, ev e n tho u gh  95%ofr oams t he  pa st, I  never onc e fou nd mys el f grit tingmy  teeth o r flipping the pages in  frust ratio n.I was hoo ked .  So , please.  Don ’t be putoff  by  thehis t oricaspe c t.  It barel y re g istered w i th  me , an d I am a se l f - con fesse d h a ter of  the  genre.Much of th e  story is setwith i n  an  in t erro ga tive context;Ana x( s hort for  A naximander) , is bei ng evalu ated b y a pa nel ofe x am i ners w ho
 a_spectacular achievement._If I could give_all the_stars_in the_sky_as a thank-you_to and for_this book, I would._I swear to_you_that I would. Dramatic, but true. Because,, the second book of Bernard Beckett’s which_I’ve_read and_loved,_is._Honestly.When I read, his first_book, I was 16 and_thirsty for_knowledge. I wasn’t satisfied with mild, un-intellectual reads_anymore._I wanted a_challenge. I wanted a surprise. And that’s what Mr_Beckett gave me. If anybody is_interested in the_kinds_of_issues which are raised_in this book, thenis the next_logical step for you. I promise_you’ll not be disappointed. Through, I realised_that Beckett had a penchant for_philosophy, and that he was_damn good_atintricate philosophical debates, with an_elegant, deceptively simple_writing style.I_found the same_in. Now, I must warn you._I agree with_all the other reviewers, and urge_you_to walk into_the_story_blindly. If_you haven’t read_this_book yet,_please_just stop reading now in case_I_spoil anything for you. You’ll regret not_listening once you’ve read_the_book; trust me on_that. I have only included_mild spoilers, but nothing you wouldn’t_know about_by the_20th page. Proceed at your own caution.The time-frame is four hours,_butthese four hours, a whole dystopian_civilisation is brought to_life before_our_eyes, and then_picked_apart. We_learn more about the past 100 years_of the_society than the present four hours._And I loved that._The_whole book was like a history_lesson, but not the kind you’d_ever have in a classroom_(unless,_of_course, you had Mr Beckett_as a teacher). Now, IHistory. Detest_it. It’s among_my least-favourite topics, after Maths and Sciences._But,_even though 95% ofroams the past,_I_never once found myself gritting my_teeth_or_flipping the pages in frustration._I was hooked. So, please. Don’t_be put off by the historic aspect. It barely_registered with me,_and I am a self-confessed_hater_of_the genre.Much of the story is set within an interrogative_context; Anax_(short for Anaximander),_is being evaluated by a panel of examiners who