Rating: 
Summary: Very enjoyable
Review: A very enjoyable plot that makes you wonder how you would find the admitted murderer...innocent or guilty? Justified or unjustified? I truly liked this book because it left me with thinking to do once I finished it.
Rating: 
Summary: It may be fiction but-----
Review: Alan Dershowitz has written a story of questioning theory.He is a thinking interlectual with a clear mind toward the pro and con of our countrys laws. This story is in the back of many of our minds. what if your family was wiped out by someone and you were left what would you do, or feel, or want? I would recommend this book highly to anyone that ever observed a criminal situation and said "if he would have done that to my family I would have_____!!! The book is a thinking mans read enjoy it.
Rating:
Summary: RESPONSE TO N.Y. OBSERVER REVIEW
Review: Alan Dershowitz's "Just Revenge" is a masterfully crafted story that challanges its readers to question their most basic instincts and ethics. The issues, dilemmas and solutions are presented through a thrilling and haunting story that keeps you from putting this book down, while at all times trying to put yourself in the shoes of the main character "Max Menuchen". Upon completeing this first-rate novel I was left compelled to ask myself who, at the NY Observer, chose to write a reveiw, and just what book had they actually read. Not only does the NY Observer reviewer totally miss the mark, but they completely betray their ignorance by trying to imply plagerized material from the wonderful Elie Wiesel book "Night". After re-reading "Night" I could find no similarity in the scenes referred to by the Observer and was left to wonder if this reviewer had some other agenda in what was nothing more than an outrageous attempt to slander Mr. Dershowitz. In fact, on the rear jacket of "Just Revenge", Elie Wiesel himself gives the book a glowing endorsement. Read this book, it will keep you talking and asking questions of yourself for some time.
Rating: 
Summary: Is revenge ever justified, legally and/or morally?
Review: Alan Dershowitz, the famous attorney and law professor, attempts in his novel, "Just Revenge," to explore the moral and legal ramifications of revenge. Is it legal or ethical for a Holocaust survivor to punish an elderly man for the actions that he committed as a Nazi collaborator during World War Two?Professor Max Menuchen is the sole survivor of a Lithuanian family that was brutally wiped out by a Nazi collaborator named Marcellus Prandus in 1942. Prandus is now an elderly man who will soon be dead of cancer. However, it is likely that he will die a contented man, since he is surrounded by his beloved children and grandchildren who admire and respect him. Max wants Prandus to experience the despair that he felt when he watched Prandus brutally exterminate his family so many years ago. Therefore, Max, with the help of a friend, concocts an elaborate scheme that results in Prandus's death. When he is arrested and goes to trial, Max is defended by attorney Abe Ringel, who argues that Max acted out of personal anguish and that his behavior was simply a desire for "just revenge". Although Dershowitz's intentions are good in writing this philosophical and psychological novel, he has not created a satisfying work of fiction. The characters are not believable and the story is little more than an excuse for a philosophical discussion about what is or is not excusable in the name of revenge. Also problematical is the ending, in which a surprise witness miraculously shows up in order to influence the outcome of the trial. I agree that the themes of revenge and forgiveness are worth exploring (as Simon Wiesenthal did in his brilliant book, "The Sunflower"). However, Alan Dershowitz's novel is too artificial to be an effective vehicle for analyzing this important subject.
Rating: 
Summary: Very disappointing
Review: Few things are more disappointing to a reader than a good story in the hands of a mediocre writer. Dershowitz is such a poor fiction writer that he drains the life from what is one of the most consistently compelling sources of fiction - the guilt and rage of survivors of unspeakable horror. His characters are so superficial and wooden that they distract from the ideas and issues he attempts to address. He totally fails to develop any type of psychological complexity in the participants in this drama. He is unable to tell his story through coherent actions and inner thoughts of his characters. As a result, he's forced to violate one of the main tenets of fiction writing - show, don't tell. He has to stop and tell us constantly why this character feels this or that, and he does it like a guy hitting a tack with a sledge hammer. There's no subtle development of each character's story, no gradual enlightenment of the reader as to why the various characters come to feel so deeply about Max, why they hate or support him, why they want to help or thwart him. The effect is jarring and distracting - female characters apparently having reasoned conversations suddenly burst into tears - for one line only. Max, after 50 years of stalwart sanity and self control, suddenly flops to the floor in a shrieking flashback, only to jump and be his intellectual and controlled self again. The victim's son ... well, he makes no sense at all. The ending is so contrived and forced that it takes the punch out of the whole story - as if the author couldn't figure out a sensible way to arrive at the ending he wanted. He's forced therefore, to have the victim's son do something so out of character that it leaves the reader feeling incredulous.
But there is one good thing to say about this story - Max's revenge is one of the most diabolically clever plans I've come across. It's damn near brilliant. Too bad it gets overwhelmed by bad prose writing.
Is the book worth reading? Well I finished it. It's a fast read, the story of the massacre of Max's family is compelling and his revenge is very satisfying. But it's not worth buying - check it out of the library.
Rating:
Summary: What a Tangled Web We Weave!
Review: I didn't know what to expect - a graduate student assigned to read a page-turner crime novel for a graduate seminar. All in all, I tend not to like Dershowitz, but I will hand it to him on this one; all things considered, he has written a good and somewhat haunting book. I'm sure the questions it raises will be with me for a long time. The scene is this: Max Menuchen is a holocaust survivor living in Cambridge, MA who discovers that the Nazi who murdered his family (by a fluke, he alone survived) is living not too far away. The pain and anguish of knowing this (and of even worse information uncovered in private research) is unbearable. Max decides to torture his killer and drive him to suicide. Is it murder? If it is murder, is it justified? Is it just revenge? The theme is explored decently and though the dialogue is stiff and the plot (particularly in the details) feels somewhat contrived, Dershowitz knows how to exploit this challenging and dark theme for all it is worth. As some reviewers have noted the characters are a bit stale, but I suppose if one is readin a Dershowitz crime novel for character depth, then one needs to evaluate their lease on life (though I grant that Dershowitz's habit of making every character, including side-characters, a lawyer, is a bit frustrating). On a sidenote, some of the less favorable reviews accuse Dershowitz of 'justifying' the main character's actions of revenge and torture. First, I must have read the wrong book as Dershowitz's ending is far from clear on that point (the last section is even entitled 'Justice?' with a question mark). Second, I thought Dershowitz did a decent job portraying many sides and opinions (as Dershowitz does in real life). Simply because he writes what some may feel are convincing argument supporting the main character doesn't mean that he is offering carte blache justification. Third, Dershowitz's goal in this book, I feel, is to make us think and one great way to do that is to get us fired up. Those that accuse Dershowitz of 'taking the wrong side' are fired up and, thus, thinking. So as not to ramble on that point, I give the book 3 stars because while I thought the theme and idea development was pretty good, there are many areas where the book felt a bit too contrived and/or superficial.
Rating:
Summary: Intriguing universal questions
Review: I liked the plot and the story. It's not one of the best books I've ever read, but it does make you think, and the purpose is to make you think about REAL JUSTICE. Quick read...
Rating:
Summary: Superb Read
Review: I truly enjoyed this book. It is entertaining and educational.
I could not put it down...
Rating:
Summary: One of the best books...
Review: I've read in a long time. Dershowitz writes a book that asks a compelling moral question. The characters in this book are incredibly likeable, and it is amazing the way Dershowitz makes the reader feel compassion for a man who committed horrible and unforgiveable acts years ago. This story portrays two sides of an unthinkable, yet very real, historical tragedy. Does a person have the right to seak revenge on a person who years ago, during the Nazi era, committed unthinkable acts of malice? Read this book and you will be intrigued.
Rating:
Summary: What a mind!
Review: This book is suspenseful, surprising, full of wisdom, as well as containing interesting information about the law as well as its limitations in rare cases for the layman. Allen Dershowitz has an emormous talent in this fiction novel to show from all the horrors that began 50 + years ealier, and a deeply affected Holocaust survivor's actions in the present that were legally wrong but morally right,
can result in a future of hope without the past being forgotten, as it mustn't be. When I read who the surprise witness was for the defense, all I could think of was the absolute brillance and cleverness of this author's mind. And what I felt inside myself was remarkable. In truth, this whole novel was in one word, remarkable. A must read for intelligent and sensitive readers everywhere!
|
