...
Show More
No star rating
Anthony Loyd has written a book which is somewhat of a paradox for me. There are two stories running in parallel here, but they are inseparable. We are shown war with great detail and clarity in Bosnia and Chechnya. The descriptions are often horrific, probably as realistic as anything in print. From this point of view, writing is good.
Intertwined with war, there is an autobiography of Loyd. This too is often horrific as he portrays his life growing up and as a heroin addict. The problem is that the two stories portray the same man, addicted to heroin and addicted to war.
As much as I appreciated the writing about the wars, I could not get over my dislike of the man, the self-admitted 'war tourist'. He was not there to fight and, although he was at first a would-be photographer and then a reporter, he makes it clear that he was there to be in a war, not to inform about the war. His only motive is self gratification. Even when he tells of his adventure in helping to save the life of a young girl, he cannot redeem himself. His tone throughout the book is disingenuous. His attitude is one of superiority. Much of what he tells us is coldly cynical. These things are not as a result of the war. They are who he is. He befriends, benefits from and even protects men who are monsters and war criminals. He is not likeable nor admirable.
His addictions, to heroin and to human suffering, are explained by his lousy relationship with his father. The reader is, I suppose, expected to have some sympathy for Loyd. I do not. Finally, although the book has its merits, I find that Loyd gets in the way. He would have done better to join the Red Cross if he wanted to see the war and do some good.
Anthony Loyd has written a book which is somewhat of a paradox for me. There are two stories running in parallel here, but they are inseparable. We are shown war with great detail and clarity in Bosnia and Chechnya. The descriptions are often horrific, probably as realistic as anything in print. From this point of view, writing is good.
Intertwined with war, there is an autobiography of Loyd. This too is often horrific as he portrays his life growing up and as a heroin addict. The problem is that the two stories portray the same man, addicted to heroin and addicted to war.
As much as I appreciated the writing about the wars, I could not get over my dislike of the man, the self-admitted 'war tourist'. He was not there to fight and, although he was at first a would-be photographer and then a reporter, he makes it clear that he was there to be in a war, not to inform about the war. His only motive is self gratification. Even when he tells of his adventure in helping to save the life of a young girl, he cannot redeem himself. His tone throughout the book is disingenuous. His attitude is one of superiority. Much of what he tells us is coldly cynical. These things are not as a result of the war. They are who he is. He befriends, benefits from and even protects men who are monsters and war criminals. He is not likeable nor admirable.
His addictions, to heroin and to human suffering, are explained by his lousy relationship with his father. The reader is, I suppose, expected to have some sympathy for Loyd. I do not. Finally, although the book has its merits, I find that Loyd gets in the way. He would have done better to join the Red Cross if he wanted to see the war and do some good.