Understand that my mediocre score on this book is because I am researching writing something in this ballpark at some point, so this gives me high expectations and sharp focus.Its deserving of a 4 or even a 5 star rating, depending on your connection to the subject.I deeply respect that he went and lived with aboriginal hunters, and spent time with trophy hunters, and hung out with anti hunters. Thats really putting your feet where your head is.I respect, too, that he went to the trouble to check into the fossil fuel costs of hunting locally vs. market vegetarianism.
Ive been wondering about this myself.I enjoyed some of his writing when he was describing his hunt quite a bit.But, overall, I felt the book was too disjointed, stylistically. He jumped from straightforward, journalistic and relatively opinion-free chapters on being embedded with these different hunting cultures, to really mellifluous and frankly stylistically overblown chapters about his own life. It felt forced and almost sanctimonious to me.Now, when that more flowery style had been going for a while, there was some enjoyable reading in there for me. Especially when he got into his descriptions of his hunts, as opposed to more personal details about his own life that I couldnt find relevant to the argument he is making in this book.In the end, its amazing that an explicit hunter was able to write a book that has been praised by both PETA and pro hunting organizations.
I mean -- thats almost beyond amazing.I also agree with him about the ethics of hunting, and the openness to the experience that he displays well in the book.If the style wasnt so disjointed I could easily give this a 4 stars, and from merely the perspective of being ground breaking it deserves a 5.But as I said, Im being picky because its so close to what I am working on, and I wanted it to be smoother.