Shanghaiist: Book Review: Shadow of the Silk Road

vid

Wed, 27 Feb 2008 04:39:38 +0800

The only travel book I've ever read was the Iron Rooster by Paul Theroux which I thought was really good (as long as you skipped the first chapter) with his conversations with the locals and observations of the people and the places. Often he would ask about the mao and/or the cultural revolution. How does this book compare with that one?

Andy Best

Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:35:53 +0800

"I don't read books looking for un-PC statements to jump on, generally I could care less. But it was so blatant in this book, there's no getting past it." You don't need to apologize for yourself and there nothing wrong with being annoyed by/caring about this kind of stuff. I think the story of the guy who believes he has roman ancestry was doing the rounds on Chinese TV lately too. I think it's probably the same guy? On the TV report he thinks it's basically because his hair is a bit curly and his nose has a prominent bridge. Sounds more like he thinks he's related to old hollywood movie romans.

MattSchiavenza

Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:29:37 +0800

I too wasn't wild about the book, and I'm usually a big fan of travel narratives. You never get the sense of what daily life is like for the people he encounters, and he didn't do a good enough job of juxtaposing the broad similarities of all cultures along the Silk Road with their modern day reality. A good travel writer gives you a sense of a place, and with Thubron I never got that- his book just seemed like a random series of encounters with different people bunched together- they didn't really seem to fit together all that well. And like the previous commenter, I was annoyed by Thubron's style- the silk-road merchant part was particularly absurd. I also noticed the complete absence of any humor or of many personal touches. There are quite a few good books written about travels in China and in Asia, but I'm afraid Shadows of the Silk Road isn't one of them.

fjiofojif

Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:05:11 +0800

This book isn't much. The guy is weirdly obsessed with race in an old-fashioned, boorish kind of way. If you want a thorough comparison of how swarthy various ethnicities are in various regions, this is your book. He doesn't seem to care much about people as individuals, and instead goes pages and pages over DNA tests to see if people are (say) part Caucasian, and when first describing people he inevitably zeros in on the traits of their facial features and what race they most resemble (the guy is an amateur phrenologist). He consistently makes poetic assumptions on romantic stereotypes of their ethnicity. I don't read books looking for un-PC statements to jump on, generally I could care less. But it was so blatant in this book, there's no getting past it. He obviously has his own very strong opinions of how the world should be, characters are very often given to express what are obviously the author's opinions, however awkward or unrealistic the conversation may be. Cab drivers are quick to give their opinion on the state of the nation. He lives in a world where people introduce themselves, then immediately go to a back room and quietly give a quick appraisal of the failings of the national government. And mastery as a writer? The book breaks down to: "I saw this. It was sad. Then I went here. It was sad. Then I went here. It was sad." And how could a review not mention the ridiculous device of arguing with an imaginary old-time silk-road merchant, who keeps calling the author "pansy-boy" and the like? That easily was the most ridiculous device I've ever seen used in a work of non-fiction.