Does it make sense to refer to this author as the godfather of travel writing?

Why is it often better for a writer to not put things into perspective?

Do nice photos, a lot of visited countries, and slick design make for a good travel book?

Why is this so choppy?

How can a book about a man running around the whole world be so boring?

If this book isn't badly written, then why is it still bad?

Is it a good thing or a bad thing when a writer starts to write about writing?

Why does esotericism so often go hand in hand with ignorance?

Is this just an epic journey through China, or does this writer also have mad skills?

What were German readers looking for in a travel book after World War II?

Was this a 14th-century fact finding mission or just another medieval mystery tale?

Is this book more about contemplation or more about adventure?

Why is it so much fun to read Medieval travel stories that are at least partly untrue?

Are these travel memoirs worth reading, or has censorship ruined them?

Did conservative ethics turn this great adventure story into such a slow read?

If Fleming is the more gifted writer, then why is this book better than his?

Would a little less irony have made this book even better?

If this is one of the classics of Portuguese literature, why is it such a slow read?

Why is this one still so good today, even though a lot of it is untrue?