So I dived back into reading hardcore fantasy on the urging of several who know me. That was about a year and a half ago. Now vie become socraven as to pester the authors of books I loved for their recommendations of what else I should read.
One of those pesterations led me directly to The Lies Of Locke Lamora, which I haven’t read yet, being backed up with rereads in anticipation of the new Rothfuss and the new Martin. But on the strength of that recommendation I passed it along to a friend who is temporarily bookless*. Then I got to thinking I should read another review or two.
Who knew there was a whole controversy surrounding a negative review of the book? A SERIOUS controversy. Short version is that the book was heavily hyped and the reviewer, in what I think was an attempt to be glibly funny, said that she wondered how the authors of the positive reviews had been bribed. All sorts then jumped on the bandwagon about how accusations of bribery verged on payola etc.
I just read one review of the review that was about 2000k words long. My eyes are still glazed over.
The weird thing is that when reading the first half of the controversial first review (I stopped reading when I realized that the grumpy chick was basically just going to summarize the entire as yet u read by me book) I never once thought anything other than that the reviewer was trying to come off as witty.
Today for any number of reasons I hate the Internet. I hate most of all that I so often fail to communicate my position in a way that isnt hurtful to others. I kind of relate to the initial reviewer in that way.
I also hate that people are so eager to get their own agenda on record that they don’t even try to figure out where the original writer was coming from. I’ve been on both sides of that equation.
The Internet is now words about word about words.
*to me the idea of being bookless is worse than just about anything other than Wellness Livnng Coaches.