Product Description

Charles didn't know much about life ... until he met The Man Without a Face

"I'd never had a friend, and he was my friend; I'd never really, except for a shadowy memory, had a father, and he was my father. I'd never known an adult I could communicate with or trust, and I communicated with him all the time, whether I was actually talking to him or not. And I trusted him ......

Fourteen-year-old Charles desperately wants two things: a father and a way out. Little love has come his way until the summer he befriends a mysterious scarred man named Justin McLeod, nicknamed ""The Man Without a Face." Charles enlists McLeod's help as tutor for the St. Matthew's school entrance exams, his ticket away from the unpleasant restrictions of his home life. But more important than anything he could get out of a book, that summer Charles learns from McLeod a stirring life lesson about the many faces of love.

‘Not much affection had come Charles’s way until the summer he was fourteen, when he met McLeod [a man whose face was deeply scarred] and learned that love has many facets.’ —BL. ‘A highly moral book, powerfully and sensitively written; a book that never loses sight of the human." —H.

1972 Best Books for Young Adults (ALA)
Best of the Best Books (YA) 1970-1983 (ALA)
Outstanding Children's Books of 1972 (NYT)

---

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #150161 in Books
• Published on: 1987-08-30
• Released on: 1987-06-30
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 160 pages

Features

• ISBN13: 9780064470285
• Condition: NEW
• Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
• Click here to view our Condition Guide and Shipping Prices

---

Customer Reviews

A moving story of trust and consequences
Man Without a Face engaged me from the first page. I picked it up because I had heard of (but not seen) the movie, and was further intrigued because I have read and liked some of Holland's mysteries. Finished Man without a Face in one sitting. Among other things, this book shows the complexity of human relationships, and how difficult it is to judge any relationship from the outside. One of the other reviewers takes the most negative view of the relationship: that it is predatory, with Justin's goal being the seduction of Charles. The most generous view is that the sexual event happened with no action on Justin's part other than holding Charles to comfort him. Given Justin's actions throughout the book, the latter is the interpretation I would place on it. I am curious, of course, what Isabelle Holland intended, and would love to know the genesis of this story.

I do think she copped out on the ending. While it neatly tied up the close of the book, life is rarely that tidy, and what's more, Charles will be haunted by Justin the rest of his (fictional) life. Thank god he has Barry, who becomes a real person to Charles toward the end of the book.

A book to be read and discussed in the family. Freedom and consequences, love, trust, intimacy, affection, and boundaries: all important themes that are worth considering whether one is 14 or 44.

This is not Tom Brown's Schooldays
Teacher/student relationships are as old as Mentor and Telemachus in the ODYSSEY. Think also of GOODBYE, MR CHIPS and TOM BROWN'S SCHOOLDAYS.***

Like other reviewers I first saw the Mel Gibson movie, then decided to read the book. Surprising to me was how different the two are. The book dates from 1972 and perhaps the revisions for the movie are an attempt at a retelling for more recent times. The decidedly athletic boy who in the book walked twice a day for four or five miles one way to his mentor's home is replaced in the film by a less vigorous boy on a bike. Pot smoking is important in the book, insignificant in the film.***

In the book the teacher does not have his pupil learn math by digging square holes in his yard. The book is altogether more conventional, low key and pedestrian. In the book the boy is obviously seriously concerned about his sexuality, which is barely looked at in the film.***

On balance, I think the book holds up better. The movie is more like a negative book review of the book than an original film. Normally, films eliminate scenes from a book. THE MAN WITHOUT A FACE adds scenes and changes the ending. This reminds of the pointlessly changed ending of the recent film verion of Graham Greene's THE END OF THE AFFAIR.***

The book is indeed an easy, quick read. But it is put together by a master and in its simplicity rings truer than the film.-OOO-

The book was good and slightly different from the movie.
I read the book Man Without a Face like another reviewer did in one sitting. I have seen the movie with Mel Gibson in it as well. A hobby of mine is to see a movie and read the book or visa versa. I don't always agree with the theory that the book is always better than the movie and I still haven't decided which I like better at this point. I think that most people that read the book after seeing the movie will not appreciate the relationship that was formed between McLeod and Charles. They will like the movie's version better. I think that the ending will also make them unhappy because they would rather have it that Mel Gibson's character has kept track of Charles through the academy from a distance. The whole plot line involving what other people thought of the relationship in the movie and assuming the wrong things about what was going on is very good but takes away from what the author intended. I believe that she wanted the book to be about Charles and finding himself not the way the movie portrayed it as the making of a friendship. Don't get me wrong it is part of the novel but not the entire basis. Charles was meant to discover his real self and all that he had been hiding because of his father and being put down by his sister. What he needed in life was a father figure that stayed and when he found one he found himself. The tittle of the novel also has a double meaning in my opinion. One of the nickname's for McLeod was the Man Without a Face but for Charles his father had no face either. If I remember clearly Charles mentions this at one point, it was part of his understanding and growing. I liked both book and movie but I suggest that if you've never seen the movie then read the book. If you have seen the movie and have throughly liked it then it might not be wise to read the book. You will either feel let down or will dislike the concepts that the book was based on. Overall I liked the book.