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?

If all the idiots love it, does that mean that this is a book for idiots?

Is this book any good for those who are not into hardcore punk?

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?

Could this talented artist have done a bit more with the material he had?

Can we really read about warfare as if it was just an adventure?

Is it possible to write a whole a book like a Roxette song, and should anyone read it?

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

Is this a book for people who care about mining?

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

Who would have thought it was possible to cross the Bering Strait on foot?

Should this book be read like a homecoming story or rather like a trip abroad?

Could nature have a greater friend than this 19th century guy?

Did this book redefine travel writing, or is it essentially just a boring stream of consciousness?

Is this book trivial and fun, or is it just plain boring?

Do we really care whose fault it was, or can we just accept that mountains are deadly sometimes?