[links] Link salad is working for the weekend

A pair of readers with small love for Green Powell’s | Amazon | Barnes & Noble | Borders  ]: here and here — In the second case, at length. I firmly believe the story belongs to the reader, but I do sometimes wonder if readers have the story I wrote in their hands.

A reader objects to one of my blurbs — Heh.

Perso-Arabic and Sinitic Literacy — Some cool stuff on Islam in China and writing systems, including this gem: This information is all the more stunning in light of the fact that Muslims in China developed a system of writing Sinitic languages […] in Perso-Arabic script.

Conservative Justices’ Strange Enthusiasm for the Punishment of the Innocent — A blog post about a recent Supreme Court decision forbidding a convicted felon from paying for his own DNA test to exonerate himself. The Roberts court found that alowing Osburne to prove his potential innocence risks “unnecessarily overthrowing the established system of criminal justice.” Compassionate conservativism my ass. Can someone explain to me why this isn’t pure batshit?

One of the Daily Kos diarists on Coburn and Ensign — This guys puts it in a nutshell: If Ensign and Coburn weren’t such outspoken crusaders for moral rectitude none of this would be anybody’s business except insofar as Ensign’s actions constituted sexual harassment or involved public resources. But both Ensign and Coburn have built a political career on passing moral judgment on others. There’s an expression about stones and glass houses that they might have considered before trying to foist their own hypocritical moral code on the rest of the country. One could ask the same question of the entire conservative movement, of course.

?otD: How easy it is being Green?

Body movement: 30 minute stationary bike ride, 10 minutes of stretching and meditation
This morning’s weigh-in: 220.2
Currently reading: n/a (Finished The Human Disguise by James O’Neil yesterday)

4 thoughts on “[links] Link salad is working for the weekend

  1. tetar says:

    Jay, I wouldn’t sweat those reviews. The one dolt admits he gave “fantasy” a try, for fuck’s sake, then demonstrates a picayune lack of comprehension and fear of “mature” elements, etc. The first reviewer, on the other hand, simply isn’t on your wavelength, that’s all. No big deal. Not everyone likes one’s voice.

    The objection to the blurb I don’t even understand. lol

  2. Keonyn says:

    I’m a dolt eh? I was not aware disliking something was cause for insults, but so be it.

    I felt I comprehended the story quite well, and I don’t “fear” mature elements, I just simply didn’t care for them in the manner they were used in the story. My last read was “Dreams Underfoot” by Charles de Lint, which is also quite mature, but in that case I felt it was used quite well.

    It’s not the reviewers task to tell you what is good or bad, but just to tell you what they felt was good or bad and provide enough information for the reader to know if they would agree or disagree. You disagree, and that’s fine, then I’m sure you will, or did, like the book. I’m not going to lie however and view the book as anything other than what I thought of it simply because someone else might think differently.

    1. Jay says:

      Erm, I’m pretty sure I didn’t insult you. At least I didn’t mean to. My apologies if so.

      I find negative reviews a lot more interesting than positive ones, which is why I almost always link to them. Your take on the book was so different from my own that it surprised me, which was the point of my comment. I really do believe that the story always belongs to the reader. I’m just sometimes surprised at what happens to it along the way.

  3. Keonyn says:

    Oh, that wasn’t directed at you Jay, sorry about the confusion. Rather, that was directed at the first commenter who I was primarily commenting in response to.

    I have nothing against you, or against the fact your linked to my negative review, I only wish my review could have been more positive.

Comments are closed.