M: Son of the Century

Understanding his formative experiences might shed light on how his personality and ideology developed. I wonder if the author aimed to show the roots of his later actions.

The book covers a complex period with lots of figures and events. I’m curious whether the pacing matched the historical importance or if it slowed down for details.

The narrative reads very vivid and personal, but I wonder what choices were made to keep it engaging without sacrificing facts. Did any creative liberties stand out?