![]() |
||
Home : Travel to Latin America :
Review:Lonely Planet Argentina Uruguay and Paraguay (Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay, 4th Ed)
Travel to South AmericaTravel-helper.com review all the media and related products you need to make your travel to South America more than perfect. Check out "Lonely Planet Argentina Uruguay and Paraguay (Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay, 4th Ed)" below.
Lonely Planet Argentina Uruguay and Paraguay (Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay, 4th Ed)
Facts Not Straight 1. I will only say that if the author of a book about a country (or countries) demonstrates in the "Facts" section not having even looked at a map of the region, showing complete lack of knowledge of the most basic geography of what s/he claims to know and write about, what reliability can you expect from such a book? I'll give you three examples from the "Facts on Argentina" section that reveal lack of knowledge of the region's geography and geopolitics. It says: "In most of Argentina and the other Rio de la Plata countries (Uruguay and Paraguay). . . ". This is the grosser mistake because Paraguay is nowhere near! the Rio de la Plata river. And that is easy to see in a map of the area this book writes about. Also from a cultural perspective, this is a gross mistake. Only Uruguay and Argentina are (and always have been) known as "the Rio de la Plata river countries". There is even a culture common to both margins of the Rio de la Plata (River Plate in English). This "rioplatense" culture (from "Rio" and "Plata") is not even shared by all of huge Argentina that is a lot more than just the region around this river that divides it from smaller Uruguay. 2. It says that Spaniard "Solýs probed the area now known as Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay". But the region occupied by what today are those three countries is VERY big--and one could not say more than Solýs probed the region around the Rio de la Plata river, which covers only a small section of today's Uruguay and Argentina (and not Paraguay). 3. It says that "Solýs died at the hands of Uruguayan tribes". This sounds almost as a joke if not an insult. Uruguayans did not exist in Solýs's times. The author might mean "the tribes *then* inhabiting *today's* Uruguay". Those tribes were not Uruguayan, just as the Apaches were not American (nationals of the U. S. ). I leave the conclusions up to you. I'm sure *some* facts must be right in this book, but such a lack of professionalism revealed in the absense of the most basic review of the facts of a book edited by a large, well knwon publisher does not inspire the least trust in me. I rather not waste my money: I am willing to pay for information--not for mis*information.
Related products:
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||