?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Zia McCorgi by Cooner

"Spill it, Short Legs!"

The Journal of Zia McCorgi

(no subject)
Zia McCorgi by Cooner
ziabandito555
Today is the final day of the Ursa Major Awards voting

http://www.ursamajorawards.org/voting2010/

Please if you haven't voted yet try and do it now. The FBA at the very least needs a serious nod.

(no subject)
Zia McCorgi by Cooner
ziabandito555
When you get down to it literature is a not a science. There is a distinct lack of objectivity to it. Oh we have rules and systems for writing books and stories. Those rules however are more there to convey ideas more easily. However even when the rules are broken, sometimes severely, a book can be considered good or at least popular. Even the rules change over time (spelling and grammar are hardly objectively set in stone).

As a librarian I have seen a lot of this even a book that is well written can be hated and a book that can objectively be called poorly written can be well liked. Individual patrons in a library all come in looking for different things. Different stories, ideas, or interests. They are also coming into a library and getting books at different times of their lives, with different preconceived notions, and with different emotional reactions to those works. A writer needs of course to try and make their message and story accessible but it is supremely hard if not impossible to write a book everyone will enjoy.

So while I found Pride and Prejudice a life changing experience when reading it and along with Frankenstein have read and reread the book book multiple times not everyone will react that way. Pride and Prejudice changed my life and the way I interact with people. This is not the case for everyone and there are people out there who find it boring and hate that book. There are a lot of people who enjoy Earnest Hemmingway and found those works life affirming or life changing while they bore me to tears. Those are the considered classics which have had a huge influence on culture and literature. Not even touching the minor works that have their own controversies and zealots.

What this means is that when we read a review we need to take it with a grain of salt. when we hear what the general public things we need to be careful. When we heard what a small zealous minority thinks there needs to be caution. We can make informed choices and inferences but when you get down to it there are a lot of unknowns when you pick up a book. You are guaranteed nothing. You're going to inherently disagree with people and experts. The same can be said of music, movies, paintings, photographs and other things. We all have emotional and intellectual backgrounds that will change our reactions to different works. The Taj Mahal was an event in my life that crystallized this as I found it stunning. But i know not everyone will find it that way.

Now we can have a consensus on what is good a general mutual agreement but it won't fit everyone. Take the information presented to you and draw your own conclusions and be the type of person who takes what people say about a subject and question it and see where that leads.

I mention all of this to say that when I review a book naturally you need to be careful with my review. Don't take it all at face value. I'll try and present what I think about it and I'll attempt to be fair and tell you extraneous information that might have influenced my reaction. In other words I'll try to do it well but in the end it will only be my opinion.