Review

[desperance]

For what it's worth, there's a review of 'Bridge of Dreams' in Romantic Times. Someone who had best remain anonymous remarked that I did seem to have strained all three of the reviewer's brain-cells. I think that's harsh, but 'difficult to absorb' surprised me too; I thought the premise was really fairly simple. Perhaps I expect too much...?

Comments

[shewhomust.livejournal.com]

Well, that's interesting. It's a fantasy, and (despite the cover) they know it's a fantasy, but they review it anyway. If you can call it a review, when, like so many alleged reviews, it's little more than a plot summary (but I digress)...

And the verdict is that this fantasy stuff requires you to pay attention to the nature of created worlds.

Would it be very wicked simply to quote ...incredibly compelling and interesting characters..., do you think?

[desperance.livejournal.com]

To be fair (and as you know, Richard is my middle name), they do review a fair amount of F/SF (eg they've just reviewed matociquala, which was what prompted me to go look in the first place). If, as you say, you want to call it reviewing. Not quite sure why they don't give their people a little more space; the poor devils have read their way through a whole book, after all, they're entitled to a page's worth of opinions about it.

Would it be very wicked simply to quote ...incredibly compelling and interesting characters..., do you think?

On the contrary: it is exactly what I have predicted my publishers will do, if they need a quote for the paperback. Except if I were they, I'd lose 'characters' and just go with the adjectives unattached.