I'd always been fascinated by the story of Lewis and Clark's historic expedition, and my appetite to learn more was whetted further after I watched the PBS special about it, so I was excited to finally read the journals for myself (on my Kindle.)
1. Each entry is purportedly "as it was written," which I consider a plus. I don't like reading edited entries of historical documents. The language used is, of course, not like our contemporary English at times, but it's easy enough to get used to it.
2. The problem is that various sections of the book repeat themselves without warning and for no reason at all. For example, you might read about the events of, say, October 1,2,3, then think you're going to read about October 4, but you find October 1,2,3 repeated verbatim (although sometimes with slight changes.) Sometimes that part is listed as having been written by the other man, but the entry is simply a copy of what had been first attributed to his partner. In other words, Lewis, say, writes, "xyz," then the entry is repeated and is attributed to Clark, but the entry is still "xyz," with no changes. WEIRD. I mean, why on earth would either one of them copy the other's entries? It's possible that the journals themselves, having been through bad weather, many strong rainfalls, snow, etc., may have been damaged, but it is disconcerting nonetheless to try to maintain a sense of accurate narrative attribution with these problems.
3. There are huge sections written by Lewis with detailed scientific/anatomical information about plant and animal species that I tried to read through at first, but became so unceasingly bored that I had to "fast forward" through them after a while. (I hated doing that, but it was either fast forward through those sections, or abandon the book altogether.)
4. Be prepared that Sacajawea is referred to by NAME only once or twice. Sad.
5. Also be prepared for absolutely no reverence for animal life. In their time, animals were put on earth simply for "Man's use." I appreciate the fact that their diet had to consist of mostly animal sources, as did their clothing, but it is disconcerting nonetheless to read incessantly of the animals killed. (And how about reading about valleys filled with bison "as far as the eye could see - maybe 30,000 or more" with the knowledge of how such "bounty" would eventually be abused and nearly destroyed in later times?)
Overall, the journals in this form were less exciting than I had expected, and very frustrating because of the strange LARGE mis-placed sections, but I appreciate the huge effort involved by the people who painstakingly transposed this work for the Kindle, and I'm still glad I read it.