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?

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?

Should travel writers deliberately look for interesting stories or just go with the flow?

Why is this book only for those who are really into environmentalism?

Was it naive to hope for peace with the Khan?

Is this another author who distances himself from his story?

Aren't less words sometimes better, even if the words are beautiful?

If this was a good writer with a good story, then why did the editors not polish it a bit?

Is this the only instance where a TV person turned into a good travel writer?

Is this another candidate for the title of worst travel book ever?

Is this the worst travel book anyone could ever imagine, or is it just the worst travel book ever created?