Comments by Lena Inglis Most recent public comments by Lena Inglis https://nowcomment.com/users/26552 Somehow I think the same can go for those who "cheerlead" a book. Their audiences trust their opinions (perhaps even blindly) and if they suggest a book and place a stamp of approval on it, it flies off the shelves. We live in the era of "influencers" https://nowcomment.com/documents/56402?scroll_to=636118 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56402?scroll_to=636118 which are pretty much promotional cheerleaders. Fri, 09 Dec 2016 18:11:06 -0500 yes, which is why Pool makes reference to Oprah's book club. Oprah never analyzes the books she chooses in depth, but just champions them for the sake of boosting sales of the items she likes. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56402?scroll_to=636117 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56402?scroll_to=636117 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 18:03:57 -0500 pool believes that it is okay to disagree and criticize a book, but in American culture we see criticism as impolite or in bad taste, so what we are left with are reviewers who have nothing but great things to say. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56402?scroll_to=636114 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56402?scroll_to=636114 Mon, 19 Dec 2016 06:25:28 -0500 shortcuts could be adjectives like: astonishing, flawed, and stunning which as pool says are nonspecific and can be applied (or misapplied) to pretty much any book. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636111 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636111 Fri, 16 Dec 2016 07:16:20 -0500 I think longer form writing allows more space to be descriptive. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636110 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636110 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:32:59 -0500 word selection is one of the hardest parts. you can write something and think "is this really what I mean?" https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636108 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636108 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:29:30 -0500 more precise perhaps. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636107 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636107 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:27:00 -0500 I think they just want to know if the reviewer thinks its good or not. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636106 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636106 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:21:55 -0500 very good point. if the reviewer leaves space to question pieces of the book, they may seem undecided. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636105 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636105 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:21:09 -0500 you're right. an authoritative tone can turn the reader off but I think ultimately, the reader wants someone who has credibility and knows what they are talking about. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636104 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636104 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:16:15 -0500 great point. we see this even with our class reviews. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636087 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636087 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 16:55:13 -0500 good point. I think thats what pool means when she says that time will never be on the reviewers side. they have to review works while they are still new. There is a short grace period for reviews as "new" in order to get buzz and sales for the book. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636086 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56401?scroll_to=636086 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 16:51:31 -0500 that's a funny observation, ha. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56405?scroll_to=636082 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56405?scroll_to=636082 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 16:34:13 -0500 A fan of it I am not. Mostly because it reminds me of yoda. But for the purpose of moving the review along, it works well. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56355?scroll_to=636073 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56355?scroll_to=636073 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 16:05:09 -0500 the purpose of an epigraph is not only to set the tone, but it is a very sophisticated form of literary device used to brush up a proceeding story. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56355?scroll_to=636068 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56355?scroll_to=636068 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 15:39:49 -0500 in this context, the author should spend more time getting into the nuances of stories that are familiar to Sinatra fans. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56355?scroll_to=636065 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56355?scroll_to=636065 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 15:32:12 -0500 that the book doesn't do the best job at getting in depth about the life of Sinatra, but if you have no prior knowledge of him, it's a decent biography. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56355?scroll_to=636064 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56355?scroll_to=636064 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 15:20:58 -0500 yes, she criticizes reviews of new books vs a canon. Because reviewers are dealing with new books, they have to get their critiques out there while their books are still new "they inevitably lack time for reflection" according to pool. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56359?scroll_to=636063 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56359?scroll_to=636063 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 15:11:33 -0500 no, she doesn't consider it a good thing. Theres a point where she compares the commentators on book sites like Amazon that write "a great read!" to the amateurs that write reviews for reputable newspapers alike. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56359?scroll_to=636062 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56359?scroll_to=636062 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 15:01:54 -0500 I think thats the problem with most reviews. There's usually some sort of "redeeming quality" even if the reviewer has logical arguments for why the piece is horrid. Or conversely, having to nit -pick and "find" something wrong. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56405?scroll_to=636058 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56405?scroll_to=636058 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 14:29:04 -0500 Pool believes that editors are the gatekeepers. I disagree. If better reviewing is to emerge, the market will have to make that happen, meaning sales. If reviews of particular books make an impact in sales, this can then trigger editors to curate reviews https://nowcomment.com/documents/56405?scroll_to=636055 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56405?scroll_to=636055 accordingly. Sat, 10 Dec 2016 07:11:52 -0500 I know what you mean. As the word count grows and the deadlines approach, you find yourself dissecting every single part of the subject you're reviewing. It can be taxing. Not an easy feat. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56359?scroll_to=636045 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56359?scroll_to=636045 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 13:59:13 -0500 Even though pool says that logical arguments and cultural awareness are needed in order to fairly critique a book, the review is still subjective and may be in disagreement with the audience. This may make it hard to do well. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56359?scroll_to=636044 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56359?scroll_to=636044 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 13:56:26 -0500 For sure. And it's important to do so. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56358?scroll_to=636035 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56358?scroll_to=636035 Fri, 09 Dec 2016 13:25:28 -0500 I agree, sarcastic indeed. That statement was filled with irony, yet it has declined over time. https://nowcomment.com/documents/56357?scroll_to=636008 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56357?scroll_to=636008 Fri, 16 Dec 2016 12:40:21 -0500