Hmmm, seems strange to me that you both would independently come to that conclusion.
Joker Send a noteboard - 17/09/2009 08:10:11 PM
It'd be one thing if it were a well-written, well-argued negative review of the book, but that review was mostly summary and very little analysis of what made it a poor novel.
It's not supposed to be a scholarly article.
Just sayin'.
Is there some secret board where fans of this novel meet to discuss how best to refute negative reviews? IS ROBERT STANEK INVOLVED???
The Magicians by Lev Grossman
- 14/09/2009 07:50:28 AM
670 Views
USA Today LAMBASTED this novel. *NM*
- 15/09/2009 07:42:28 PM
192 Views
That was a rather poor review of the book
- 15/09/2009 09:59:27 PM
391 Views
It's a newspaper review... it's supposed to summarize and maybe analyze a little.
- 17/09/2009 02:07:37 AM
389 Views
It's still a poorly done review, even for a newspaper review.
- 17/09/2009 04:28:15 PM
379 Views
Hmmm, seems strange to me that you both would independently come to that conclusion.
- 17/09/2009 08:10:11 PM
425 Views
I know the difference
- 17/09/2009 05:55:46 PM
457 Views
You should apply at USA Today. Show 'em a thing or two!
- 17/09/2009 08:08:39 PM
447 Views
Why not Publishers Weekly?
- 17/09/2009 10:24:57 PM
357 Views
Well, I have a big penis.
- 18/09/2009 04:42:41 AM
376 Views
Junk Comparing Competition. I can see I have accomplished everything I wanted with this review 
- 18/09/2009 06:05:41 AM
359 Views
- 18/09/2009 06:05:41 AM
359 Views
That's basically what it comes down to whenever anyone disagrees with Larry.
- 20/09/2009 12:39:32 AM
404 Views
Well, I didn't like The Grapes of Wrath or The Old Man and the Sea...
- 23/09/2009 05:37:14 PM
477 Views