Heft on Wheels: A Field Guide to Doing a 180 by Mike Magnuson
It’s hard to write about a book that is supposed to be some heartfelt confessional when you don’t like the book, but I didn’t like it. Sorry. I found the writing style irritating and, in large part, pointless. Magnuson is a creative writing teacher at Southern Illinois University. I’m not quite sure what to think about that, but the entire style of the book reads like one long affectation. Even Kerouac wrote in complete sentences!
The story could have been a good one, it’s certainly compelling enough. It would have been way better with a ghost writer. Magnuson went from a 255-pound chain smoking drunk with a passion for cycling to 175-pound racer in a little over a year. He did it in, as he says, all the wrong ways (which easily could have left him dead or incapacitated) and he does, at least, say the reader should not follow his example (which makes one wonder what the whole “Field Guide” aspect of the title is all about).
But really, I didn’t care about any of it. The only thing that marginally drew my interest is the story of Saki, the bike shop worker friend, but even that was told in a weird way that was entirely anti-climactic. At the end of the book, Magnuson is not someone I’d ever want to meet. And if you’re interested in creative writing, my advice would be to stay away from Southern Illinois. It’s a shame really, there was a lot of potential here.
December 26th, 2006 at 11:40 am
You do have a point on his writing style, it’s not perfect. But
it’s about how people love to ride and suffer for the love of cycling.
I would imagine you are a writer and not rider that is why you didn’t get it.
As I am a rider and not a writer and you will tell me my writing sucks too.
Chad
December 26th, 2006 at 11:48 am
Actually, it’s the other way around. I am a rider (after all, the name of this site is “cycling.finial.com”) and not a writer (which should be obvious :> ). I do, however, read a lot.
I have no argument with what he’s trying to say, or at least what I think he’s trying to say. My 2d paragraph, in fact, starts “The story could have been a good one, it’s certainly compelling enough.” I did “get it.” It is a compelling story, it’s just not compellingly told.