Matt,Originally posted by Matthew Field:
I think I read Steve Mills' comment as his wanting more books covered per issue of Genii.
Whoops! Uh oh! I mean Jamy's and David's and Eric's!Originally posted by Dave Shepherd:
...and particularly both Jamy's and David's book reviews...
Fortunately you don't have to subscribe to read the reviews: http://www.mylovelyassistant.comOriginally posted by Dave Kane:
I'll bet a lot of magicians would subscribe to a publication devoted solely to reviews-I know I would.
Isn't that what a good review is supposed to give you? I think a well written review should be entertaining and informative even to readers who will not purchase/view/use the product under review. That's what Jamy does. It is what I have tried to do during my last five years writing for Genii.Originally posted by Dave Kane:
Maybe he needs a new title for his column "valuable education on the subject matter and on conjuring in general"
I'd prefer short books with long reviews, or tall women in short skirts.Originally posted by Bob Farmer:
Frankly, I'd prefer longer reviews of fewer books, not shorter reviews of more books.
not at all...take a gander at the New York Times Book Review -- each piece is roughly the size of a Swiss review (frequently larger) and constitutes a reasonably substantial reflection on the content of the reviewed work (as an example, this week's review of the report of the 9/11 commission takes up 7 webpages....)ditto for the The New Yorker...they stretch the notion of what traditionally constitues a review
Suprisingly, yes!Perhaps, Bob, but could Borges do a decent bottom deal?
Stanislaw Lem, the greatest science fiction writer known to me, wrote Imaginary Magnitude, a book of introductions to other -- fictional -- books. The structure is a perfect vehicle for the kind of commentary Lem delights in. It's also a natural for Lem's self-referential bent; the book has an introduction, on the subject of writing introductions for books.(Nathan Coe Marsh)
Indeed, though I'm not familiar with his work, my understanding is that Jorge Luis Borges would often write reviews of imagined books...merely as a vehicle for reflecting on a set of ideas that merited a book-length treatment without having to write the book (and with the ability to comment on the work in a way impossible internally)...