Sign in with Facebook
Adam Shields's Reviews > Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy
Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy
by
by
Full review at
Short reviews: I keep going back and forth between 3 and 4 stars. I think this was a good biography. And it left me wanting more, which I think is a good sign. Metaxas did a good job pulling Bonhoeffer out of the boxes that he is often put into. He was more than just a theologian or writer, or part of an assassination plot. But there were some editing errors and lots of strange descriptions. I called them Dan Ratherisms in my full review. They were descriptive, but distracting. On the whole though, this was a needed popular biography but there are now more biographies and I would skip this one in favor of others.
____
After a couple years, all of the digital ink spilled about the accuracy and more reading of other biographies here are my modified thoughts. There are issues with Metaxas trying to make Bonhoeffer into a modern US Evangelical. On the whole, if you have the money I would suggest that you buy and read Ferdinand Schlingensiepen's biography "Dietrich Bonhoeffer 1906-1945" My review or Charles Marsh's biography Strange Glory
The problem with that Schlingensiepen’s biography is that it is expensive. I got it on a one day sale and it is way better than Metaxas biography. Schligensiepen is from Germany, knew and worked with many of the characters of Bonhoeffer's life and is a renowned Bonhoeffer scholar. Metaxas is none of those things. Metaxas is a decent writer and he has written a much needed popular biography of Bonhoeffer.
Charles Marsh is more available and also much better than Metaxes.
Short reviews: I keep going back and forth between 3 and 4 stars. I think this was a good biography. And it left me wanting more, which I think is a good sign. Metaxas did a good job pulling Bonhoeffer out of the boxes that he is often put into. He was more than just a theologian or writer, or part of an assassination plot. But there were some editing errors and lots of strange descriptions. I called them Dan Ratherisms in my full review. They were descriptive, but distracting. On the whole though, this was a needed popular biography but there are now more biographies and I would skip this one in favor of others.
____
After a couple years, all of the digital ink spilled about the accuracy and more reading of other biographies here are my modified thoughts. There are issues with Metaxas trying to make Bonhoeffer into a modern US Evangelical. On the whole, if you have the money I would suggest that you buy and read Ferdinand Schlingensiepen's biography "Dietrich Bonhoeffer 1906-1945" My review or Charles Marsh's biography Strange Glory
The problem with that Schlingensiepen’s biography is that it is expensive. I got it on a one day sale and it is way better than Metaxas biography. Schligensiepen is from Germany, knew and worked with many of the characters of Bonhoeffer's life and is a renowned Bonhoeffer scholar. Metaxas is none of those things. Metaxas is a decent writer and he has written a much needed popular biography of Bonhoeffer.
Charles Marsh is more available and also much better than Metaxes.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Bonhoeffer.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
March 30, 2010
–
Started Reading
March 30, 2010
– Shelved
June 10, 2010
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-8 of 8 (8 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Bgordondavis
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Nov 13, 2011 04:54AM
You articuiated well what was in my mind.
reply
|
flag
Having just finished this book, I am reading some past reviews. I know just what you mean about the strange descriptions being distracting. I didn't know whether to laugh or grimace and chose not even to try to describe this in my brief review. I also went back and forth between 4 and 5 stars for the same reason, ultimately going with 5.
Yes, the Dan Ratherisms, they bugged me too!
Only a couple of chapters in. Love the book. Hate the Ratherisms. He uses the word highfalutin, at one point.
Seriously! He wants to be taken seriously as a scholar, but says highfalutin!
I am glad to know that I'm not the only one who found this distracting. I am sad to hear that it continues throughout the book.
A good editor could have made this a much better book. I am disappointed that Thomas Nelson didn't insist. But then I read his bio on Wiberforce after I read this. This is much better than the Wilberforce bio.
Almost done and I've been thinking about how I would describe the "creative" language that has been bothering me in this otherwise good biography. I just stumbled across this review and your coining of the term "Dan Ratherisms." Awesome. Thanks! :)
