huitthuitt's review against another edition
3.0
I think this is the first book I was required to read for my forensics class senior year in high school that I genuinely read (you know how required reading sucked).
Everything was interesting and I referred back to it a lot when talking about cases Maples has done.
Everything was interesting and I referred back to it a lot when talking about cases Maples has done.
beththeawkward's review against another edition
This book wasn't what I thought it would be, which is my bad. I was looking for something more about what examinations of the dead can tell us about how earlier peoples lived; but this book is very true crime focused. I should have paid attention to the fact that the author is a FORENSIC anthropologist, again that's my bad. I am really uninterested in true crime.
zara_m's review against another edition
4.0
Some of you guys need to chill out omg. Are you forgetting the type of person who wrote this and the time he wrote it in? Of course he's going to be arrogant and self important; he's been told how great he is his entire life and he's a successful white man. I genuinely don't think he knows any better. And I can forgive him because he knows his stuff and he's dead. I acknowledge the subtle sexism, but you cannot possibly think a man like this is going to be some great feminist activist. Anyway, yeah he does often drone on about how great he is, but I didn't find it annoying or upsetting because I don't think it's coming from a bad place. He really is very knowledgable and clever and I think there's more to gain from that than there is from criticizing his ego, if that makes sense. You know when you meet someone really interesting who loves to talk about their really interesting experiences and knowledge? This book is like that I think, but it's better because you are in no way obligated to listen to all that he has to say. So if you're someone who is easily annoyed by arrogance I don't think this would be a fun read, but if you can look past that, then there's really interesting stories and descriptions and just thoughtful writing overall. Also, he's very funny and the writing is not at all bad, which is sometimes what happens when a non writer writes a book. I'd say this book is equal parts biography and true crime, so expect some mildly irrelevant life stories about baboon bites and apology letters from New Hampshire investigators. I will say, I wish this book included some stories where he had been found wrong in his findings because he did mention that it happens of course, but it would be cool to know the stories where he was not the hero.
circularcubes's review against another edition
5.0
I savored every word. This is going right onto my favorites list, no bones about it.
pinkpanther's review against another edition
dark
funny
informative
lighthearted
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
4.5
simlish's review against another edition
3.0
I have a tendency to read a lot of similar non-fiction at a time. Dead Men Do Tell Tales suffered greatly for being read immediately after [b:Death's Acre: Inside the Legendary Forensic Lab the Body Farm Where the Dead Do Tell Tales|15251|Death's Acre Inside the Legendary Forensic Lab the Body Farm Where the Dead Do Tell Tales|William M. Bass|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1309204605l/15251._SX50_.jpg|207394], which covered the same topic, but much better. Dead Men Do Tell Tales is much more of a memoir, with the conceit of being cases out of the desk of Dr. Maples. It doesn't fully commit to that conceit until the second half of the book.
The first half is full of very short cases, often unsolved, which don't really seem to have... a point. Which feels awful to say, since these were real murders, but I'm not reading about forensic anthropology to gawk at gory murders and all the awful ways we kill each other, I'm reading about it to learn about how it works, what we can learn from bodies, and how the information is used by the police/courts/etc. Getting three paragraphs about a skull found in a coffee can with clear signs that it had been stripped of flesh, and oh, by the way, nothing was pursued and no one was caught does not meet those needs, and leaves me feeling like a creep, since I'm just oohing and ahhing over awfulness.
Maples is also very present in this book, in a kind of off-putting way! He talks a lot about how much he looks down on people who don't treat dead bodies with respect while I'm getting the vibe that he's not respecting bodies. He's super weird about women at all times -- one of the things that annoyed me most was that almost every single woman he worked with professionally, he identifies by her husband. The word "pompous" is used a lot in reviews of this book, and I would like to agree with it; he drops a ton of references and isn't content to just let them speak for themselves, but needs to make sure you, the reader, understand how clever he is. And he is smart! He is clearly incredibly accomplished in his field, which is not an easy one, very well read and well traveled. But I found myself hissing "shut uuuuuup" regularly while I was reading, so, like. That's not a positive.
All right, good points, because even though I was a little bit hate-reading by the end, there were good aspects: Maples actually acknowledged that life style and genetics can effect a skeleton and make it more difficult to sex correctly. Trans people do exist in his world, though his terminology for them was so nineties that I had to pause and remind myself it was an old book. In the second half, when he started doing actually in-depth cases, they were pretty interesting! He had a mix of modern murders that he helped solve and identification work he did with historical skeletons (Pizarro and the Romanovs, specifically), and being able to follow what he did and how it fit in with the bigger picture was exactly what I wanted from the book. They were interesting cases and were well presented.
In the final chapter/afterword, he reveals that the point of the book was to draw attention to forensic anthropology as a field because it's underfunded and would be much more effective with more money. He made a passionate, clear plea that I found myself entirely agreeing with. But I also thought that if that was the point of the book, he could have done a better job of carrying that theme through: choosing to present well-funded cases next to ones that weren't solved due to lack of funding, and making that distinction clear throughout, would have made more sense than the random mishmash present in the beginning of the book.
The first half is full of very short cases, often unsolved, which don't really seem to have... a point. Which feels awful to say, since these were real murders, but I'm not reading about forensic anthropology to gawk at gory murders and all the awful ways we kill each other, I'm reading about it to learn about how it works, what we can learn from bodies, and how the information is used by the police/courts/etc. Getting three paragraphs about a skull found in a coffee can with clear signs that it had been stripped of flesh, and oh, by the way, nothing was pursued and no one was caught does not meet those needs, and leaves me feeling like a creep, since I'm just oohing and ahhing over awfulness.
Maples is also very present in this book, in a kind of off-putting way! He talks a lot about how much he looks down on people who don't treat dead bodies with respect while I'm getting the vibe that he's not respecting bodies. He's super weird about women at all times -- one of the things that annoyed me most was that almost every single woman he worked with professionally, he identifies by her husband. The word "pompous" is used a lot in reviews of this book, and I would like to agree with it; he drops a ton of references and isn't content to just let them speak for themselves, but needs to make sure you, the reader, understand how clever he is. And he is smart! He is clearly incredibly accomplished in his field, which is not an easy one, very well read and well traveled. But I found myself hissing "shut uuuuuup" regularly while I was reading, so, like. That's not a positive.
All right, good points, because even though I was a little bit hate-reading by the end, there were good aspects: Maples actually acknowledged that life style and genetics can effect a skeleton and make it more difficult to sex correctly. Trans people do exist in his world, though his terminology for them was so nineties that I had to pause and remind myself it was an old book. In the second half, when he started doing actually in-depth cases, they were pretty interesting! He had a mix of modern murders that he helped solve and identification work he did with historical skeletons (Pizarro and the Romanovs, specifically), and being able to follow what he did and how it fit in with the bigger picture was exactly what I wanted from the book. They were interesting cases and were well presented.
In the final chapter/afterword, he reveals that the point of the book was to draw attention to forensic anthropology as a field because it's underfunded and would be much more effective with more money. He made a passionate, clear plea that I found myself entirely agreeing with. But I also thought that if that was the point of the book, he could have done a better job of carrying that theme through: choosing to present well-funded cases next to ones that weren't solved due to lack of funding, and making that distinction clear throughout, would have made more sense than the random mishmash present in the beginning of the book.
melancauley's review against another edition
4.0
HISTORY! MYSTERIES! CONSPRACIES!
Reading this book was like watching every forensic/crime TV show out there all at once. Dr. Maples, one of the leading forensic anthropologists of the 20th century, sheds new light on such iconic cases.
(bonus: epigraphs galore!)
Reading this book was like watching every forensic/crime TV show out there all at once. Dr. Maples, one of the leading forensic anthropologists of the 20th century, sheds new light on such iconic cases.
(bonus: epigraphs galore!)
dajna's review against another edition
3.0
The strange and fascinating cases of a forensic anthropologist is indeed strange a fascinating. I expected some first-hand tale from recent events, but the historical studies are extremely interesting too. Can I tempting you by saying that he finally solved Anastasia's mystery? Yes, the never-found daughter of the Russian Tzar.
Every chapter is devoted to a specific case. The writer decided to keep the more personal of these episodes for the last one, but I failed to epathized with it. I think I was too captivated by the grandeur of the previous protagonists - yes, there's even a US president in there.
I also had some slight deja-vu moments. I read several other books about this topic and Mr Maples is right: there's no abundance of forensic anthropologists in the world and several stories sounds similar. But please don't take it in the wrong way: is still a book worth reading, both if you like the subject and if you're just approaching it.
Every chapter is devoted to a specific case. The writer decided to keep the more personal of these episodes for the last one, but I failed to epathized with it. I think I was too captivated by the grandeur of the previous protagonists - yes, there's even a US president in there.
I also had some slight deja-vu moments. I read several other books about this topic and Mr Maples is right: there's no abundance of forensic anthropologists in the world and several stories sounds similar. But please don't take it in the wrong way: is still a book worth reading, both if you like the subject and if you're just approaching it.