#book evaluation

[ksbrooks]

How Do I Know if My Writing.... Sucks?

How Do I Know if My Writing…. Sucks?

This article has two purposes: The first is to discuss a specific question. The question, in its most simple form, is how do you know whether your writing is any good? Specifically, are you good enough to publish your first book and expect to be able to attract and satisfy readers and, if you aren’t, how do you figure out what areas to focus on improving to get there? (more…)

View On WordPress

[the-apocryphal-one]

Evaluation of ACoTaR series after finishing it:

Pros:

- The characters are great. I mean they’re great. I especially want to give a shout-out to the side characters. They all have well-defined and rounded out personalities, and just bring a lot of delight and character to the screen. Even the ones I hate, I hated because they were hateable, not because they were boring.

- Relationship and character development are solid. like holy shit I love the friendships, not just between Feyre and other people, but between other people and other people. All those side characters are so great because they get so much time to be people, to hang out with their friends and grow and admit their own failings.

- The romance in the second book is a lot better than the one in the first. It’s a great, old-fashioned slowburn, which has the advantage of building off a (non-romantic but teased) relationship established in the first book.

- The author’s worldbuilding and descriptions. There are seven different Fae lands and they all get screentime, some more than others, but enough that you can grasp the unique cultures of each. And they’re all described in lovely terms, but not so much I felt I was drowning in prose.

- The fantasy politics are fun to watch play out, when they’re actually in focus. Also, I do enjoy having morally gray/skeevy heroes who acknowledge they aren’t entirely good people.

- PTSD and the general topic of war are handled well and respectively. The characters are affected by what they go through, they’re traumatized, and they have to slowly heal from it. It’s never dismissed or brushed off as something love can fix.

Pet Peeve:

- Male/female is not a good synonym for man/woman. And it’s everywhere. It irritated me fast.

Cons:

- Pacing/plot. The author can write characters and she has good ideas for the plot, but it’s like she doesn’t know how to balance them and so devotes the majority of her time to the former. Most of the time, the plot’s just building in the background before suddenly kicking into overdrive. It’s worst in the first book, where the plot doesn’t pick up until over halfway through. I was not exaggerating when I said Rhysand saved ACoTaR for me; it’s not just because I like him, but because his appearance finally kicked the plot into motion. I was seriously contemplating putting it down before then. Maas gets a little better about it after that, but the plot doesn’t really become the main focus until the third book.

- The romance in the first book. Tamlin’s a boring love interest and being around him makes Feyre boring too. Which is really bad when them being together makes up the bulk of said book’s first half. Feyre is interesting when she’s away from him, especially after the Rhys plot-fae appears, and Tam gets interesting in the second book...but getting there is a drag.

- Related to that, the author is a bit too fond of gratuitous sex scenes. Especially ones that bog down her already slow pacing. It’s never a good thing when your reader starts skipping pages, the way I was.

- The final battle was somewhat of a let-down. There were plenty of badass moments, don’t get me wrong, but...well, if you’re going to emphasize a lot of worry about the final battle, then you should make that worry justified, to explain it in a spoiler-free way.

- The fourth book is completely unnecessary. It's supposed to be about the reconstruction after the third, yet it’s very short and there’s very little about the actual reconstruction. It feels like filler, especially since the third ended fine. Just don’t read it.

Overall...tentative recommendation? At least for the first three. If you’re not the type of person who enjoys very character-based stories, you probably won’t enjoy it. I did, in the end, but I won’t pick up more of Maas’s work. I’m hesitant to even grab the fifth book when it comes out because the fourth was really disappointing.

[workfilteredbottlewatero]

Review of Islam in NYT e book Recapitulation

The January 6, 2008 edition by the brand ny instances e booklet instrumentation was devoted so as to "Islam," insomuch as the swan dive so the edition gutsily proclaims. The edition aims to highlight some in one of the too appropriate factual, literary, political and theological matters informing new man gab near in transit to the subject of Islam, since it is found in latest literature. The work to drop decorative lighting on this sort of an considerable subject is notable. What follows are my comments near to the certain content articles and essays. They stick to the purchase introduced within your e chalk Review. 1. This circumstance in the e book evaluation starts wherewith Tariq Ramadan's great essay examining the Koran. Ramadan is inward-bound a location to capture within of a concise essay equally the simplicity along using the nuanced complexity in the Koran (Qur'an). Its languishment is rooted inflowing its ability to singularly tackle the believing heart. At this drawn the Qur'an is very simple and universally accessible. each and every fellow finds favor its message, filtered through the prism of her \ his individual experiences, mental cultivation, joy, chafe, triumphs and setbacks, a unique intimacy. At this level, the information calls for "nonobservance puppet." This may be the time frame of what Ramadan refers to since the dialogue that exists among the Qur'an and its reader. Ramadan beautifully captures the spirit of that dialogue.<\p>

Nonetheless, the Qur'an can happen to be nuanced and its information may possibly be pro tanto advanced at one more level, a visibly more advanced one that seeks unto accurately completely grasp the legal, pleasurable, and rectitude implications in the message. Here, the challenge, Ramadan informs us, is "to worm out the Islamic prescriptions that govern matters of faith, of religious practice, and of its embryonic precepts." right here literalism and conviction do not consider inclusive purely far, although alter embue appreciably in the prevailing polemics circumambient discussions in the Qur'anic messages within your pontification of equally Muslims and non-Muslims.<\p>

At what price Ramadan mentions, this may possibly be studied a domain that calls for the specialized methodological options in the Qur'anic scholar. It is all those options that suppose for the productive want for of trigger toward divine recto. That this sort of an ask for is effectual is illustrated nth degree through the prolix qualifications of Islam, and captured within your much literate we have innate through the all-knowing Qur'anic exegetes. These methodological tools, would comport concerning the deep information in the poetry and vocabulary in the Arabs, grammar, rhetoric, logic, information in the Meccan and Medinan verses (signs) in the Qur'an, jointly with other sciences that Ramadan does not mention.<\p>

Polis in reference to all those options is augmented from the possession of the conclusive, important chap that Ramadan does expound on-a deep-reaching spiritual-mindedness that produces an inseparable fusion among the center along using the mind. It is this fusion that distinctly opens the doorstep to some faithful and bottomless depths<\p>

[jakob-the-tactician]

If I ever write a book I will make it completely literal and if it becomes famous and shit I will take a class that I will have to read my book (under a fake name) and when we evaluate the book I would just laugh my ass off at how off the teach thinks it has some deep meaning