Sunday, September 02, 2007

Today's Inquirer reviews ...

... represent, in my admittedly biased opinion, a rather intriguing mix.

... Ed Champion thumps the tub for Warren Ellis's Crooked Little Vein: Comic-book master brings forth a novel.

... David Walton considers what's in a name: Importance of being Amerigo.

... Scott Esposito has mixed feelings about some early Ryszard Kapuscinski: Young reporter travels with ancient Greek as guide.

... Elizabeth Fox enjoys Laurie Viera Rigler's Confessions of a Jane Austen Addict - up to a point: L.A. girl lives a fantasy life: Austen's.

Imagine: Two bloggers reviewing on the same printed page. What will people say?


  1. Anonymous10:14 AM

    Ed Champion's review is suspiciously similar to Sarah Weinman's critique from her blog. This takes pillow talk to a creepy new level.

  2. Well, even worse, they both review for me. Different people do often arrive at the same conclusions, you know. You'll have to send me a link, though, since I can't find Sarah's discussion of it. And, if you don't mind my asking, why do you have to be anonymous? I ask because I have noticed that some of the snarkiest comments on this blog are from "anonymous."

  3. I presume, anonymous, that you mean Sarah's column in the LA Times, which I just read. I see only a casual resemblance myself, two different people who both like the same book, regarding which you must say certain things for the sake of the reader - nothing "suspicious" at all.

  4. Anonymous11:58 AM

    This anonymous coward, who doesn't seem to be aware that I do indeed have an independent mind and that I often vociferously disagree with those who are closest to me (just ask my pals), is referring to this post, which was written more than a week after I turned in the review (7/28 -- and, as is my wont, nobody but the Philly Inquirer sees the review until it appears in the newspaper):

    As someone who has followed Warren Ellis's work for many years and who enjoyed CROOKED LITTLE VEIN on its own merits, I ask this weak-kneed and inept castigator to offer explicit examples as to the "creepy" similarities s/he observed. If s/he can make a valid point, I will happily address his/her concerns. But what I see here is an unsubstantiated case of "J'accuse!"

    I must also ask whether this "anonymous" (anonymouse?) reader even bothered to note where I quibbled over Ellis's imagery or Ellis's preoccupations with American culture.

    Has it occurred to "anonymous" that I am also a mystery reader and am thus sufficiently qualified to identify a book that is "a much-needed kick in the butt" for the genre?

  5. Here's what I know: I know Ed's voice. I know Sarah's. Anon clearly doesn't know either of them.
    Ed, your notion that the crime genre needs a kick in the butt resonates with me, but Ellis seems more descended from Kotzwinkle than the kind of ruthless butt kicker required.

  6. Good point, David. Ed and Sarah do not sound at all alike.