As the complete-review note, "considerable displeasure" seems to be the overridding critical view. I disagree, saying:
Coetzee's prose is often matter-of-fact, almost rugged. His work is compelling nonetheless because of the way, in scenes like the awful and affecting rape in his Booker winning Disgrace, he investigates calamities and confrontations and our responses to them. Coetzee is an ethicist. We read him for his incisiveness. But a great writer - and Coetzee is such - also knows that pacing, narrative and form are vital parts of their work ... Slow Man is the work of a peerless writer working out via his writing the value of what he does. Writing is always a set of ethical choices. Choosing Coetzee means that we, as readers, need to involve ourselves in those difficult choices too.