I read the author's book City of the Dead last year and I think I liked that better. In the author's afterward he talks about the difficulty in finding actual first hand accounts of survivors and I think that is the issue. He used what he could find and blended them together into fictional characters but they didn't seem as "fleshed" out as the characters in The City of the Dead. Perhaps it is also because so much about the epidemic of 1918 is still unknown. It was a horror of history but doesn't have a satisfying ending...like a medical solution...it's just a horror. I will put it on the shelf next to The City of the Dead but not sure how well it will do.
No comments:
Post a Comment