![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Random Punditry
Jan. 5th, 2005 08:19 amOn Reviews
Had an interesting discussion with![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
maureen_the_mad last night about my last review for RtE. She figures that since one of the things I like about the job is that I can say whatever I really think, why not trash a book just because I don't like it, or at least say "I hated it, but..."?
And it's sure tempting. Thing is, what I hate more than that book is reviewers who get high and mighty about the things I care about. How many times has one of us wanted to club someone who sniffed "If you have to read romances, this one isn't too awful" or "It was surprisingly enjoyable although it's just science fiction" or "I suppose someone out there might like it... if they're the sort who reads slash." I don't want to be that person.
Show me an objective flaw and I'll strike like a falcon in the dive. Plot only work because of sloppy police procedure, blind luck, bad science, or total lack of regular security measures? Have one or more characters who don't have the brains God gave a kumquat? Make the main narrator a mind-numbingly stilted blowhard? Author have a creepy obsession, like mentioning weight over and over and over or introducting characters not by saying what they looked like, but listing who they slept with? (Yeah. Both have happened.) Make assumptions that will offend, disgust, or confuse a portion of the readership? (I just read one that assumed the readers were all conservative Catholics and hinged the motive on a pre-Vatican II tenet. Oh, and feminist was code for "I like to tease and abuse men.") I'll make it the centerpiece of my review.
But I can't bring myself to trash a well-written book just because *I* didn't want to read it. I'll keep my comments about "who would wanna read...?" to my circle of friends. I have, in fact, given several decent-to-good reviews to books I would have tossed had I read them for pleasure; this is just the first one that I couldn't say anything nice... so I didn't say anything at all. On the whole, my reviews boil down to one of three ratings:
1) This is great! (optional quibbles about minor flaws)
2a) This'll kill a couple of hours on a slow day
2b) This is readable enough, but be aware that X, Y, or Z may not be your cup of tea
3) Put the Book Down And Back Away Slowly And Nobody Gets Hurt.
ETA: Speaking of reading, I have discovered that Levenger's "book bungee" bookmarks make very nice zine bookmarks. Perfect for those little digest buggers, and good for medium to thick zines if used horizontally instead of vertically
Pro-Choice
It's all over Google News (and the paper papers I read): Access to the Plan B emergency contraceptive does not increase risky sexual behavior. Furthermore, women who have it already on hand are more likely to use it, including women who can get it without a prescription. (Assuming, of course, that the pharmacist lets them, which was not covered in this study.)
$5 says that the next complaint (aside from the standard "don't let it where young girls can get it) is "But we're going to call it an abortion pill even though it prevents ovulation and act as though it's the moral equivalent of third trimester elective abortions."
Had an interesting discussion with
maureen_the_mad last night about my last review for RtE. She figures that since one of the things I like about the job is that I can say whatever I really think, why not trash a book just because I don't like it, or at least say "I hated it, but..."?And it's sure tempting. Thing is, what I hate more than that book is reviewers who get high and mighty about the things I care about. How many times has one of us wanted to club someone who sniffed "If you have to read romances, this one isn't too awful" or "It was surprisingly enjoyable although it's just science fiction" or "I suppose someone out there might like it... if they're the sort who reads slash." I don't want to be that person.
Show me an objective flaw and I'll strike like a falcon in the dive. Plot only work because of sloppy police procedure, blind luck, bad science, or total lack of regular security measures? Have one or more characters who don't have the brains God gave a kumquat? Make the main narrator a mind-numbingly stilted blowhard? Author have a creepy obsession, like mentioning weight over and over and over or introducting characters not by saying what they looked like, but listing who they slept with? (Yeah. Both have happened.) Make assumptions that will offend, disgust, or confuse a portion of the readership? (I just read one that assumed the readers were all conservative Catholics and hinged the motive on a pre-Vatican II tenet. Oh, and feminist was code for "I like to tease and abuse men.") I'll make it the centerpiece of my review.
But I can't bring myself to trash a well-written book just because *I* didn't want to read it. I'll keep my comments about "who would wanna read...?" to my circle of friends. I have, in fact, given several decent-to-good reviews to books I would have tossed had I read them for pleasure; this is just the first one that I couldn't say anything nice... so I didn't say anything at all. On the whole, my reviews boil down to one of three ratings:
1) This is great! (optional quibbles about minor flaws)
2a) This'll kill a couple of hours on a slow day
2b) This is readable enough, but be aware that X, Y, or Z may not be your cup of tea
3) Put the Book Down And Back Away Slowly And Nobody Gets Hurt.
ETA: Speaking of reading, I have discovered that Levenger's "book bungee" bookmarks make very nice zine bookmarks. Perfect for those little digest buggers, and good for medium to thick zines if used horizontally instead of vertically
Pro-Choice
It's all over Google News (and the paper papers I read): Access to the Plan B emergency contraceptive does not increase risky sexual behavior. Furthermore, women who have it already on hand are more likely to use it, including women who can get it without a prescription. (Assuming, of course, that the pharmacist lets them, which was not covered in this study.)
$5 says that the next complaint (aside from the standard "don't let it where young girls can get it) is "But we're going to call it an abortion pill even though it prevents ovulation and act as though it's the moral equivalent of third trimester elective abortions."
