ellauri067.html on line 247: Loppupäässä alkaa lukijoiden mielenkiinto Pynchoniin herpautua. Against the Day 2006 ( just ennen meidän Springfieldin reisua) inspired mixed reactions from critics and reviewers. One reviewer remarked, "It is brilliant, but it is exhaustingly brilliant." Other reviewers described Against the Day as "lengthy and rambling" and "a baggy monster of a book", while negative appraisals condemned the novel for its "silliness" or characterized its action as "fairly pointless" and remained unimpressed by its "grab bag of themes". Alkoi mennä jo ylijuonikkaax.
ellauri067.html on line 493: Book reviewers have a long history of attacking Pynchon for his flat characters. Roger and Jessica are susceptible to this criticism. Neither is given much of a history. We don’t know where they grew up or who their parents were. This is one of the great failings of... what to call it? "middlebrow" is antiquated... anyway, a very common kind of criticism (common in the Anglo-American world, anyway), and it affects how authors write (which is one reason I read mainly Russian literature these days). I don't need to know "where they grew up or who their parents were" and I don't much care, unless, of course, you write about it brilliantly because that´s truly what you want to focus on, as opposed to "welp, better provide a plausible background for my characters so the reader will believe they're behaving this way." Just write good sentences in a good and surprising order. Two people have fallen out of love? I don't care if it's because one of them has mommy issues or the other was bullied as a child—people fall out of love all the time, for any reason or none, just tell me what they do about it, and in language that makes me want to keep reading! Teoxet on tärkeät, vähät elämästä. En jaxa luontokuvauxia, hyppään ne heti yli.
ellauri069.html on line 368: Goodreadsin suositeltu bookrevieweri (29 August 2017 John Pistelli) koittaa selittää mihkä Neppi pyrkii, TLDR rajoitteisella sanamäärällä. Tänkin rakettitieteilijän Brennschluss tulee liian aikaisin, ei tässä ihan kuuhun asti päästä.
ellauri094.html on line 654: The body of Algernon Charles Swinburne’s poetry is so vast and varied that it is difficult to generalize about it. Swinburne wrote poetry for more than sixty years, and in that time he treated an enormous variety of subjects and employed many poetic forms and meters. He wrote English and Italian sonnets, elegies, odes, lyrics, dramatic monologues, ballads, and romances; and he experimented with the rondeau, the ballade, and the sestina. Much of this poetry is marked by a strong lyricism and a self-conscious, formal use of such rhetorical devices as alliteration, assonance, repetition, personification, and synecdoche. Swinburne’s brilliant self-parody, “Nephilidia,” hardly exaggerates the excessive rhetoric of some of his earlier poems. The early A Song of Italy would have more effectively conveyed its extreme republican sentiments had it been more restrained. As it is, content is too often lost in verbiage, leading a reviewer for The Athenaeum to remark that “hardly any literary bantling has been shrouded in a thicker veil of indefinite phrases.” A favorite technique of Swinburne is to reiterate a poem’s theme in a profusion of changing images until a clear line of development is lost. “The Triumph of Time” is an example. Here the stanzas can be rearranged without loss of effect. This poem does not so much develop as accrete. Clearly a large part of its greatness rests in its music. As much as any other poet, Swinburne needs to be read aloud. The diffuse lyricism of Swinburne is the opposite of the closely knit structures of John Donne and is akin to the poetry of Walt Whitman.
ellauri099.html on line 46: The Picture of Dorian Gray is a Gothic and philosophical novel by Oscar Wilde, first published complete in the July 1890 issue of Lippincott's Monthly Magazine. Fearing the story was indecent, prior to publication the magazine's editor deleted roughly five hundred words without Wilde's knowledge. Despite that censorship, The Picture of Dorian Gray offended the moral sensibilities of British book reviewers, some of whom said that Oscar Wilde merited prosecution for violating the laws guarding public morality. In response, Wilde aggressively defended his novel and art in correspondence with the British press, although he personally made excisions of some of the most controversial material when revising and lengthening the story for book publication the following year.
ellauri100.html on line 262: Return to D.C.: When asked why, replied “Give a person an opportunity to feed at the public trough and that person will take the opportunity.” Incentives work! Another incentive was the opportunity to criticize analysis (instead of doing it), as an in-house reviewer of technical reports. Notice how I always returned to my masters like a dog after running awaay. It's Peters principle: I had reached my glass ceiling. I just couldn't do anything else. Unfortunately, my position AND PAY deteriorated at each round, until I ended up basically an over-aged proofreader.
ellauri112.html on line 683: Marlo, already a mother of two, begins the film heavily, outrageously pregnant: we learn, in rapid succession, that this third pregnancy was unwanted, that her husband does little of the domestic labour, and that her “shitty” upbringing is the reason she’s so committed to her nuclear family unit. Postnatal depression, never named, haunts the narrative: her wealthy brother offers to pay for a night nanny to avoid, in his words, the advent of another “bad time” like the one that followed the birth of her son, Jonah. When the nanny arrives – described by more than one reviewer as a “millennial Mary Poppins” – the panacea seems to be working. Not only does she look after the baby at night but she also operates as a kind of empathy machine, listening to Marlo’s problems, sharing sangria in the garden, and baking the Minions cupcakes that Marlo herself never has the time to make. The postnatal depression, it seems, disperses; Jonah – who has “emotional problems” – finds a place at a school more suited to his needs, family dinners get increasingly wholesome, and Marlo does a passable Stevie Nicks impression at a child’s birthday party. And then comes the twist: after a bender in Brooklyn with Tully, a sleep-deprived Marlo, drunk at the wheel, drives her car off a bridge and ends up in hospital, and we realise there was nobody else in the car. Her maiden name, we learn, was Tully.
ellauri132.html on line 134: His writings are bombastic and pretentious, as well as unoriginal, indeed derivative ... one book reviewer said, "his writings are awash in spiritual mumbo-jumbo".
ellauri132.html on line 138: The widespread take on E T. is - as one commentator points out - E.T. offers a "contemporary synthesis of Eastern spiritual teachings" and another reviewer wrote, "Tolle's clear writing and the obvious depth of his experience and insight set it apart" (what, WHAT?!).
ellauri147.html on line 259: A reviewer at Sens Critique wrote: "Emily in Paris projects the same twee, unrealistic image of Paris as the film Amélie". RTL.fr wrote: “Rarely had we seen so many clichés on the French capital since the Parisian episodes of Gossip Girl or the end of The Devil Wears Prada.”
ellauri150.html on line 480: Eugene Luther Gore Vidal (/vɪˈdɑːl/; born Eugene Louis Vidal, October 3, 1925 – July 31, 2012) was an American writer and public intellectual known for his epigrammatic wit, erudition, and patrician manner. Vidal was bisexual, and in his novels and essays interrogated the social and cultural sexual norms he perceived as driving American life. Beyond literature, Vidal was heavily involved in politics. He twice sought office—unsuccessfully—as a Democratic Party candidate, first in 1960 to the United States House of Representatives (for New York), and later in 1982 to the U.S. Senate (for California). His third novel, The City and the Pillar (1948), offended the literary, political, and moral sensibilities of conservative book reviewers, the plot being about a dispassionately presented male homosexual relationship.
ellauri151.html on line 161: The book was a huge commercial success, quickly going through two editions. Reviews were favourable, but not all so. In an unsigned piece in The Times the reviewer opined, "We owe it to literature to protest against this last production of Mr. Dickens. Shades of Fielding and Scott! Is it for such jargon as this that we have given your throne to one who cannot estimate his eminence?" However, William Makepeace Thackeray enjoyed the book immensely: "To us, it appears it is a good Christmas book, illuminated with extra gas, crammed with extra bonbons, French plums and sweetness.This story is no more a real story than Peerybingle is a real name!
ellauri182.html on line 115: Some reviewers thought Kitchen was superficial in style and substance, and overly sentimental. Todd Grimson in the Los Angeles Times Book Review wrote that, ‘“Kitchen’ is light as an invisible pancake, charming and forgettable ... The release of information to the reader seems unskilled, or immature, weak in narrative or plot.” Elizabeth Hanson of the New York Times Book Review took issue with the overall effect of the book, writing that “the endearing characters and amusing scenes in Ms. Yoshimoto’s work do not compensate for frequent bouts of sentimentality.” Hanson added that the book’s main appeal for English-language readers “lies in its portrayal of the lives of young Japanese who are more into food and death than sex. EAT! KILL! but do not FUCK!".
ellauri182.html on line 269: Ei kaveri, näillä aiheilla et hevin pääse hilloviivalle, varoittelee David Morin, minkä myös scientific reviewer, tuplabaccalaureus Viktor Sander päätä pyörittäen vahvistaa. Impotenssi näytti puuttuvan keskustelunaiheista. Se kuuluisi ehkä tohon vihon viimeiseen aiheryhmään.
ellauri184.html on line 80: Mailer's fifth novel, Why Are We in Vietnam? was even more experimental in its prose than An American Dream. Published in 1967, the critical reception of WWVN was mostly positive with many critics, like John Aldridge in Harper's, calling the novel a masterpiece and comparing it to Joyce. Mailer's obscene language was criticized by critics such as Granville Hicks writing in the Saturday Review and the anonymous reviewer in Time. Eliot Fremont-Smith calls WWVN "the most original, courageous and provocative novel so far this year" that's likely to be "mistakenly reviled". Other critics, such as Denis Donoghue from the New York Review of Books praised Mailer for his verisimilitude "for the sensory event". Donoghue recalls Josephine Miles' study of the American Sublime, reasoning WWVN's voice and style as the drive behind Mailer's impact.
ellauri197.html on line 176: Clifton's three books of poetry were published by Duckworth. The first was Dielma and Other Poems in 1932 and then followed Flight in 1934. One commentator has said that “Clifton was particularly adroit at poems honouring – and marvelling at – women” and the Times Literary Supplement stated that “His lyrics are a gracious tribute to the beauty of women”. These were fairly conventional poems unlike his final work Gleams Britain's Day published in 1942. The Spectator described it as “expressing in a sort of prophetic certitude opinions upon religion, patriotism, love, art, war and peace, which he puts in unconventional verse”. The reviewer stated that the book was “the product of a curious, whimsical mind, full of energy, squandering it on half-digested ideas”. W B Yates dedicated his poem, Lapis Lazuli, to Clifton who had given him a valuable Chinese lapis lazuli carving.
ellauri198.html on line 144: Not all reviewers agree that Warren’s work deserves such unqualified praise. Though Warren tackles unquestionably important themes, his treatment of those themes borders on the bombastic. Warren becomes ridiculous on occasion, whenever we lapse from total conviction. His philosophical musings are “sometimes truly awkward and sometimes pseudo-profound.” Warren thus joins a central American tradition of speakers—Emerson, Thoreau, Henry Adams, Norman Mailer—who are not only the salesmen but the advertisers of their own snake oil.”
ellauri214.html on line 81: With talk of sex and drugs, the British author's first adult novel marks a turn away from her family-friendly series about a boy wizard. Some reviewers call her first book after the "Harry Potter" series an attack on conservatives, with one tabloid saying it presents "500 pages of relentless socialist manifesto masquerading as literature."
ellauri222.html on line 103: In the culture of little magazines, friendship is the last thing to prevent one writer from reviewing the work of another. As a novelist happy to have well-disposed reviewers, Bellow had an obvious stake in these friendships. But the friends had a stake in Bellow, too. As Mark Greif points out in his important new study of mid-century intellectual life, “The Age of the Crisis of Man,” Bellow came on the scene at a time when many people imagined the fate of modern man to be somehow tied to the fate of the novel. Was the novel dead or was it not? Much was thought to depend on the answer. And for people who worried about this Bellow was the great hope. Atlas quotes Norman Podhoretz: “There was a sense in which the validity of a whole phase of American experience was felt to hang on the question of whether or not he would turn out to be a great novelist.”
ellauri222.html on line 151: “Herzog” was nevertheless received the way all Bellow’s novels had been received: as a report on the modern condition. Many of the critics who reviewed it—Irving Howe, Philip Rahv, Stanley Edgar Hyman, Richard Ellmann, Richard Poirier—knew Bellow personally and knew all about the divorce. (Poirier was an old friend of Ludwig’s; the review he published, in Partisan Review, was a hatchet job.) None of these reviewers mentioned the autobiographical basis of the book, and several of them warned against reading it autobiographically, without ever explaining why anyone might want to. The world had no way of knowing that the story was not completely made up.
ellauri222.html on line 153: Howe wrote that “Herzog” was a novel “driven by an idea”—the idea that modern man can overcome alienation and despair. Howe could see the appeal of this idea, but he was worried that it might not have been “worked out with sufficient care.” The reviewer in the Times Book Review thought that the novel offered “a credo for the times.” “The age is full of fearful abysses,” the reviewer explained. “If people are to go ahead, they must move into and through these abysses,” and so on.
ellauri245.html on line 155: I received something in Sweden’s Svenska Dagbladet that I don’t think I ever had before: an unqualified trouncing by a reviewer who felt that the book sensationalized violence. The review seemed so emotionally charged that I could only conclude that The Leopard not only wasn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but a brew that really stuck in some readers’ craws, a book whose brutality and scenes of violence could truly alienate readers.
ellauri272.html on line 77: A lady reviewer for the Ledger-Enquirer described the book as guilty fun and escapism, and that it "also touches on one great aspect of female existence, viz. female submission."
ellauri272.html on line 408: Ammons wrote about humanity's relationship to nature in alternately comic and solemn tones. His poetry often addresses religious and philosophical matters and scenes involving nature, almost in a Transcendental fashion. According to reviewer Daniel Hoffman, his work "is founded on an implied Emersonian division of experience into Nature and the Soul," adding that it "sometimes consciously echoes familiar lines from Emerson, Whitman and Dickinson."[citation needed]
xxx/ellauri103.html on line 221: But in principle, I admire his courage – if only because he invited this kind of ethical forensics in a review out of San Francisco: “When a white male author writes as a young Nigerian girl, is it an act of empathy, or identity theft?” the reviewer asked. “When an author pretends to be someone he is not, he does it to tell a story outside of his own experiential range. But he has to in turn be careful that he is representing his characters, not using them for his plot.” Depends on who gets the money, I'd say. Chris Cleave hardly gave it all away to poor Nigerian gals.
xxx/ellauri103.html on line 224: This same reviewer recapitulated Cleave’s obligation “to show that he’s representing [the girl], rather than exploiting her.” Again, a false dichotomy. Unlike Kingsley Amis and his dad, we well-to-do white Americans can do both. America is a representative democracy, after all. We represent, y'all just stick to picking the cotton.
xxx/ellauri103.html on line 226: Of course he’s exploiting her. It’s his book, and he made her up. He owns her, she is her property. He is free to fuck her, rape her, do whatever he wants. The character is his creature, to be exploited up a storm. Yet the reviewer chides that “special care should be taken with a story that’s not implicitly yours to tell” and worries that “Cleave pushes his own boundaries maybe further than they were meant to go.”
xxx/ellauri103.html on line 235: My most recent novel The Mandibles was taken to task by one reviewer for addressing an America that is “straight and white”. It happens that this is a multigenerational family saga – about a white family. I wasn’t instinctively inclined to insert a transvestite or bisexual, with issues that might distract from my central subject matter of apocalyptic economics. Yet the implication of this criticism is that we novelists need to plug in representatives of a variety of groups in our cast of characters, as if filling out the entering class of freshmen at a university with strict diversity requirements. Besides, America IS straight and white, at least the America I know about. I haven't had time to appropriate any Nigerian girls yet, nor Afro Americans even.
xxx/ellauri103.html on line 243: For it can be dangerous these days to go the diversity route. Especially since there seems to be a consensus on the notion that San Francisco reviewer put forward that “special care should be taken with a story that’s not implicitly yours to tell.” Why on earth? Isn't it just the opposite? If it is somebody else's story you are free to do whatever you want, since you don't know it, so you can give free reins to your imagination! Chances are your all-white panel don't know the people either, so anything goes.
xxx/ellauri103.html on line 248: Behold, the reviewer in the Washington Post, who groundlessly accused this book of being “racist” because it doesn’t toe a strict Democratic Party line in its political outlook, described the scene thus: “The Mandibles are white. Luella, the single African American in the family, arrives in Brooklyn incontinent and demented. She needs to be physically restrained. As their fortunes become ever more dire and the family assembles for a perilous trek through the streets of lawless New York, she’s held at the end of a leash. If The Mandibles is ever made into a film, my suggestion is that this image not be employed for the movie poster.” Your author, by implication, yearns to bring back slavery. Failing that, she does the best to poke fictive fun at a fictive member of the underprivileged race. Nobody laugh?
30