I wrote some while back about a book I'm reviewing (note that's friends locked) - and I read a few more chapters tonight between coffee with
brisingamen and the start of Brideshead Revisited (of which more later) and then after In Bruges waiting for the bus (ditto).
I've been told to write a review to a length which suits its importance.
Avoid
I'm guessing more will be needed? You never know, it might get better (and the last chapter, mostly on William Burroughs is more than adequate). But - given the subject - I looked up Dick and Bester in the index. Nada. Ditto for Delany - but then he's spelt Delaney (and note the use of LeGuin which is a step above Leguin I suppose).
Two sentences in particular had me head scratching.
"Aldiss sees [More, Swift, Defoe, and Verne] as uncles to Shelley."
"During the 1960s and 1970s, linguists such [sic] de Saussure (1959), Austin (1962), Halliday (1964), Labov (1966), Searle (1969), and Ohmann (1971) exploited their knowledge of the constituent parts of language as tools in exploring different ways to analyze literary texts." [see the header here for the second huh?]
And does K. Amis really fit in a list of non-academic critics? New Maps of Hell was delivered at sodding Princeton.
Unfortunately, I suspect this chapter is written by a grad student. I'm not sure how honest I should be.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
I've been told to write a review to a length which suits its importance.
Avoid
I'm guessing more will be needed? You never know, it might get better (and the last chapter, mostly on William Burroughs is more than adequate). But - given the subject - I looked up Dick and Bester in the index. Nada. Ditto for Delany - but then he's spelt Delaney (and note the use of LeGuin which is a step above Leguin I suppose).
Two sentences in particular had me head scratching.
"Aldiss sees [More, Swift, Defoe, and Verne] as uncles to Shelley."
"During the 1960s and 1970s, linguists such [sic] de Saussure (1959), Austin (1962), Halliday (1964), Labov (1966), Searle (1969), and Ohmann (1971) exploited their knowledge of the constituent parts of language as tools in exploring different ways to analyze literary texts." [see the header here for the second huh?]
And does K. Amis really fit in a list of non-academic critics? New Maps of Hell was delivered at sodding Princeton.
Unfortunately, I suspect this chapter is written by a grad student. I'm not sure how honest I should be.
Tags: