[issybird]

I don't have much to add to the cogent comments above. I think it's entirely possible that a poor translation erased all the nuance differentiating the various voices, but the book is still skimpy and flat. The device of using various viewpoints should have progressively revealed further "truths" about Akhenaten, but he remained essentially the same character throughout; in fact, we learned more about the various interviewees through the process, which was the most interesting aspect of the book.

I agree with sun surfer both about the book's being pitched to modern sensibilities and beliefs and also about its reading young. It felt like a book directed to the middle school audience to me and indeed, the interviews read like something a kid would do for his school paper. I expected a wealth of historical detail and immersion in the Egyptian royal court of millennia ago, essentially a great read in addition to any tricks in discovering the truth that Mahfouz could employ and I think my disappointment in how the book read has perhaps unfairly impacted my judgment of it. I was happy enough to read it and was entertained, but clearly Mahfouz's Nobel didn't rest on this slight effort.