Search StormRaven's books

Random books from StormRaven's library

Bluebeard's Egg and Other Stories by Margaret Atwood

Predator's Gold by Philip Reeve

The Princess and Curdie by George MacDonald

Star Trek 9 by James Blish

Dungeon Crawl Classics #52: Chronicles of the Fiend by Harley Stroh

Legends & Lairs: Portals & Planes by Mike Mearls

The Three-Minute Universe by Barbara Paul

Members with StormRaven's books

Member connections

Friends: aethercowboy, AMZoltai, AngelicaHarris, AS_King, AsYouKnow_Bob, Atomicmutant, clamairy, ClaudiaMoscovici, darrow, David_M_B, DWWilkin, EdwardEinhorn, fitzwater, Jesse_wiedinmyer, jimroberts, joririchardson, jsherri, KeithFowler, MarkMcLaughlin, MyBookishWays, Nazgullie, NCSE, paradoxosalpha, RexDart, Robyn_Bradshaw, SeanJQuirk, Smethers, spacecommuter, stezton, Sundry, theoldman, ThomasCWilliams, yapete

Interesting library: ablachly, AlanPoulter, Amsa1959, angrystarlyt, AnnieMod, AntAllan, ArmyAngel1986, Audacity88, avatiakh, Beezie, bookluvrmindy, Bookmarque, books4Juliet, branadain, buchleser, Buzzregog, calm, catfantastic, Cecrow, cirdan747, cthulhuslibrarian, darrow, DaynaRT, DragonFreak, DWWilkin, EchelonPressLLC, EmScape, Enamoredsoul, Engnova, flouncyninja, Goldengrove, iansales, indigo7, internisus, jamietr, jbenny57, jigj119, jimroberts, joririchardson, JustinTheLibrarian, justjim, kassetra, klarusu, kroseman, ladylenneth, Larou, LawrenceMSchoen, leennnadine, Leitheoir, LizzieD, Locke, LouBriccant, macha, majkia, Makifat, Maladee, mhatchett, mmignano11, monohex, Moses_Siregar_III, mothshade, nilsr, OldSarge, PandorasRequiem, pdp, PolymathicMonkey, Powerslave214, prosfilaes, psybre, rameau, RandyStafford, reading_fox, RebeccaAnn, rolandperkins, ronincats, saltmanz, Schehezerade, scoutlee, sirfurboy, Spunkypineapple, stevetempo, stezton, sweetiegherkin, TerryMcCarthy, TimothyBurke, timspalding, usnmm2, wendyrey, whitewavedarling, yapete

Member gallery (2)

(see all 2 pictures)

RSS feeds

Recently-added books

StormRaven's reviews

Reviews of StormRaven's books, not including StormRaven's

Helper badges

see all 2 pictures

Member: StormRaven

CollectionsYour library (8,372), Currently reading (68), Magazines (545), Reviewed (462), Review pending (10), RPGs (598), To read (6,006), All collections (8,372)

Reviews464 reviews

TagsScience Fiction (4,105), Fantasy (2,661), Short Fiction (1,583), Locus Nominee (1,454), Anthology (1,189), RPG (619), Magazine (554), Young Adult (499), Collection (414), d20 (401) — see all tags

Cloudstag cloud, author cloud, tag mirror

Recommendations3 recommendations

About meFather of two, lawyer, collector and reader of books. Science fiction and fantasy form the core of my collection, but I've got a wide variety of other books too. I'm a Tiger (Woodberry Forest School), a Cavalier (the University of Virginia), and a Patriot (George Mason University School of Law), for whatever that is worth. I'm now also a student at George Mason University, returning for more classes in the Spring of 2011.

I have a profile on Blogger and a blog tied to it under the name "Book Addict". I am currently in the process of cross-posting all of my reviews to the blog. I'm also on BookMooch.

"I cannot live without books." – Thomas Jefferson

"Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write." - John Adams

"Books are awesome." - Frozone

What Kind of Reader Are You? Your Result: Obsessive-Compulsive Bookworm You're probably in the final stages of a Ph.D. or otherwise finding a way to make your living out of reading. You are one of the literati. Other people's grammatical mistakes make you insane.

What Kind of Reader Are You? Quiz Created on GoToQuiz

About my libraryIf a book is listed in my library here, I own it. I've also read it unless it is marked "to read" even if I may have read it so long ago that I only remember the fact that I read it. If it isn't listed here, that doesn't necessarily mean I haven't read it. I may have read it but don't own the book and therefore it won't show up here.

I'm going to try to review most, if not all of the books listed in my library - but that is a process that will likely take me quite some time to complete. With books ranging from classics of western literature, an entire range of science fiction and fantasy running from pulp to "new wave" to post-cyberpunk, a collection of young adult works, and a pile of role-playing game materials of varying vintage, it is difficult to come up with a single standard for rating and reviewing books that will apply to them all. I'm not going to try. There is no coherent standard that applies to all of these books, so don't look for one.

There is really no way to compare, for example, Milton's Paradise Lost, with Dahl's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory or Cooper's Last of the Mohicans. And this doesn't even begin to consider trying to compare nonfiction and fiction works, and of course, the red-headed stepchild of my library - the collection of role-playing game material. My solution is this: books are rated compared to what I consider to be their peers, and rated according to the standards that I think apply to a book from that group.

In addition, when I review a book, I usually include information about the plot and characters. Though I generally try to only include such spoiler type information to the extent necessary to substantiate what my review says about the book, some people don't like any spoilers at all. To those people I can only say: don't read my reviews.

Also, in my tags I reference several awards, listing many books as either winners, or nominees. These awards are:

Campbell Award: This refers to the John W. Campbell Memorial Award for Best Science Fiction Novel and has been awarded every year since 1973, except in 1994. Recipients are selected by a jury. The award should not be confused with the similarly named John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer.

Clarke Award: This refers to the Arthur C. Clarke Award, a British award given for the best science fiction novel first published in the United Kingdom during the previous year first awarded in 1987. The book is chosen by a panel of judges.

International Fantasy Award: This was an annual literary award for the best science fiction or fantasy book and, in 1951-1953, the best non-fiction book of interest to science fiction and fantasy readers. It was awarded by a panel of prominent fans and professionals in 1951-1955 and 1957.

Hugo Award: This award is given every year for the best science fiction or fantasy works and achievements of the previous year. The award is named after Hugo Gernsback and they have been presented every year since 1955. The attendees of the annual Worldcon vote for nominees and choose the winner. There have been a handful of "retroactive Hugos" handed out.

Locus Award: This award has been given since 1971 to provide guidance to the Hugo Award judges, these awards are presented to winners of Locus Magazine's annual readers' poll at an annual banquet.

Mythopoeic Award: Awards for literature and literary studies are given by the Mythopoeic Society to authors of outstanding works in the fields of myth, fantasy, and the scholarly study of these areas.

Nebula Award: This is an award given each year by the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America (SFWA) for the best science fiction or fantasy fiction published in the United States during the two previous years. The award is voted on by SFWA members and has been presented since 1965.

Newbery Award: The John Newbery Medal is a literary award given by the Association for Library Service to Children of the American Library Association (ALA) to the author of the outstanding American book for children. The award has been given since 1922.

Prometheus Award: This award for libertarian science fiction novels is given out annually by the Libertarian Futurist Society. The award was founded in 1979, but was not awarded regularly until 1982. A Hall of Fame Award (for classic works of libertarian science fiction, not necessarily novels) was created in 1983, and the Society also presents occasional one-off awards.

World Fantasy Award: An annual international award given to authors and artists who have demonstrated outstanding achievement in the field of fantasy. They have been given since 1975 and are handed out at the World Fantasy Convention. Winners are chosen by a panel of judges.

Groups(BOMBS) Books Off My Book Shelves 2012 Challenge, 100 Books in 2010 Challenge, 100 Books in 2011, 100 Books in 2012 Challenge, 2012 books read, 37 oldies in 2011 challenge, 50 Book Challenge, 75 Books Challenge for 2009, 75 Books Challenge for 2010, 75 Books Challenge for 2011 —show all groups

Favorite authorsLloyd Alexander, Poul Anderson, Isaac Asimov, Stephen Baxter, John Bellairs, Gregory Benford, Alfred Bester, David Brin, John Brunner, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Orson Scott Card, C. J. Cherryh, Arthur C. Clarke, Susan Cooper, Bernard Cornwell, Roald Dahl, Samuel R. Delany, Phil Foglio, Neil Gaiman, Ursula K. Le Guin, Joe Haldeman, Robert A. Heinlein, Frank Herbert, A. S. King, Nancy Kress, Madeleine L'Engle, C. S. Lewis, Patricia A. McKillip, Michael Moorcock, Larry Niven, Andre Norton, Naomi Novik, Frederik Pohl, Jerry Pournelle, Robert Silverberg, E.E. 'Doc' Smith, J. Michael Straczynski, J. R. R. Tolkien, Harry Turtledove, John Varley, James White, Gene Wolfe, Roger Zelazny (Shared favorites)

Homepagehttp://dreamingaboutotherworlds.blogspot.com/

Also onBlogger, BookMooch, Facebook, Twitter

Membership LibraryThing Early Reviewers/Member Giveaway

Real nameAaron

LocationPurcellville, Virginia

Account typepublic, lifetime

URLs http://www.librarything.com/profile/StormRaven (profile)
http://www.librarything.com/catalog/StormRaven (library)

Member sinceSep 30, 2008

Currently readingGood News Bible: Today's English Version by God
Analog Science Fiction and Fact: Vol. CXXXI, No. 3 (March 2011) by Stanley Schmidt
Asimov's Science Fiction: Vol. 35, No. 3 (March 2011) by Sheila Williams
Analog Science Fiction and Fact: Vol. CXXXI, No. 4 (April 2011) by Stanley Schmidt
Analog Science Fiction and Fact: Vol. CXXXI, No. 5 (May 2011) by Stanley Schmidt
show all (68)

Most recent activity

StormRaven added:
Gemini Rising: Ethereal Fury by Jessica O'Gorek

StormRaven rated:
The Amazing Pitsville and The Beggar's Invisible Railways by Gabe Redel

StormRaven added:
The Last Thane by Douglas Niles

StormRaven added:
Anne of Avonlea by L.M. Montgomery

StormRaven added:
Callaghen by Louis L'Amour

StormRaven added:
Q Is for Quarry by Sue Grafton

124: To be fair, ambrithill brought children into the discussion back in #59 when he cited his experience raising them as evidence that children are inherently sinful and have to be taught to be good.

Thanks (once again) for coming to my defense.

posted by AsYouKnow_Bob at 2:33 pm (EST) on Oct 10, 2012

Thank you for your in-depth and descriptive review of "More Than Human" by Theodore Sturgeon. Fabulous.

posted by psybre at 2:06 pm (EST) on Sep 26, 2012

As an attorney and an atheist (agnostic?), I am curious of what you think of the phrase "acts of God" in most legal contracts under the Force Majeure section. I realize that it is a legal term but I am surprised that that specific wording is still used. It implies that God causes hurricanes, earthquakes, etc. for specific reasons.

posted by Quixada at 2:32 pm (EST) on Apr 9, 2012

Never considered putting my magazines in... hmmm

posted by jlabeatnik at 11:33 am (EST) on Nov 7, 2011

Oh, man. I remember that Sep/Oct '74 issue of IF like it was yesterday and not almost 40 years ago. The greatest of all the Flandry novels, and the most painful to read.

posted by wombat-socho at 1:25 pm (EST) on Oct 27, 2011

I'm pleased you find my library "interesting."

In fact, I'm looking to sell off large chunks of it. It's not that I don't still love the books, I've simply run out of space. If you know of any collectors interested, please let me know. Most everything is first edition hardback, and about two-thirds are signed and/or inscribed and/or numbered.

Regards,

Lawrence

posted by LawrenceMSchoen at 8:36 pm (EST) on Oct 17, 2011

Greets:

+1 Nice review: http://www.librarything.com/review/36844708

posted by theapparatus at 9:55 am (EST) on Jul 28, 2011

I noticed a couple of typos in your review of Cobb's Legion Cavalry. I assume you would rather know about them than not.

"found., and"
"lost int he details"
"Spotslyvania Cout House"

posted by jimroberts at 12:08 pm (EST) on Jul 1, 2011

Frankly, I've given up on Propter. Either he's literally too clueless to understand what he's doing (which I doubt, since he's a functional enough adult to get onto this site), or he's being deliberately obtuse in order to get everyone to walk away so he can declare 'victory'.

posted by BruceCoulson at 11:01 am (EST) on Apr 29, 2011

Oooooooooooooooooooohh! You're gonna by SO blocked!!

posted by Makifat at 11:46 am (EST) on Apr 18, 2011

Looking at your profile picture—what style is that you study?

posted by TadAD at 4:00 pm (EST) on Apr 1, 2011

Denton is a lovely town! We love it!

posted by MyBookishWays at 1:25 pm (EST) on Jan 16, 2011

Yes, I think of myself as a diligent Early Reviewer too (with one cardinal exception), but I'm also careful only to select books I'm pretty sure I'll want to read!

You're absolutely right, of course: it's probably more a matter of undiscriminating "Christian literature" readers, rather than undiscriminating fantasy readers. Although I must say, I'm sure there are plenty of fantasy readers today who haven't read (for example) Lieber, Zelazny, Howard or Moorcock. Piers Anthony and Robert Jordan rank considerably higher than any of them in the LT "Authors" Zeitgeist data.

But Christians (especially the Evangelical Christian-ist sort) now have their own parallel media insulated from comparison to the secular arts, which results in some pretty dismal stuff. I find it easy to avoid, although I have succumbed to the "slumming" temptation at least once. It's really a shame that this complex includes "fantasy" of a comparably low quality, given that there is a legacy of intelligent fantasy by reflective Christians addressing themselves to a general readership instead of the neo-Christian ghetto. I'm no fan of C.S. Lewis (liked Narnia okay as a kid, was appalled by an adult re-read of The Last Battle, profoundly loathe his pop-theological writings), but George MacDonald is pretty excellent, and I've recently picked up a few books by Charles Williams, whom I have sufficient grounds to suspect of being worth the read. Gene Wolfe's Catholicism is artfully reflected in much of his fantasy. Stephen Donaldson pisses me off ideologically, but he can write a story. So hacks like Paul really have no excuse.

posted by paradoxosalpha at 9:50 am (EST) on Jan 10, 2011

I think the nail in the coffin for me as far as the Bible/Christianity is concerned was the few years I lived in Utah. The LDS devotion and reverence for the Book of Mormon, which any rational person would look upon as a fraud perpetrated by a charlatan, is phenomenal. Quite strange, in that it is of such recent provenance, and that there is no shortage of documentary evidence illustrating the character of J. Smith and the books of fantasy from which he derived his conception of Precolumbian America (not to mention the subsequent refutation of his fantasies through archaeological investigation).

But, with the question of literary/historical value put aside, what is the difference between blind acceptance of this book as opposed to the Bible? The Mormons still manage to hook in converts by the score by giving people a framework for their lives, an exalted position as a tiny golden cog in a great cosmic wheel, a nice security blanket wrapping that elusive concept of meaning. You can fool some of the people most of the time, and there's a sucker born every minute.

As with whores and politicians, age gives a patina of respectability to religion, and a 2000 year run is "evidence" enough for some people. And if the fundamental tenets of the Book of Mormon can be looked at objectively, and rejected as patently ridiculous, what makes the Bible immune to just this type of scrutiny?

(No doubt this message will be quoted back to me one day, by some adversary known or unknown, as evidence of my "intolerance".)

posted by Makifat at 10:15 am (EST) on Dec 2, 2010

Thanks for the book recommendations. "Predictably Irrational" was available as an ebook so I have bought and downloaded it. If I let it jump my TBR queue I will hopefully read it this weekend or sooner. "The Upside of Irrationality" is not available in ebook format but I found an ebook sample which I also downloaded. I'll maybe buy the dead tree version of that one later.

Thanks again for the recommendations.

posted by sirfurboy at 9:05 am (EST) on Aug 25, 2010

Yes, that's true. I appreciate your honesty, even if I don't always agree with you on everything (I seem to remember we clashed on some points on libertarianism some while back... - maybe you can explain it to me sometime). And it's always good to know a lawyer ;-) (although I have no clue what kind of law you do).

posted by yapete at 5:53 pm (EST) on Jul 19, 2010

Yeah, I don't own a copy of the book myself yet, so that makes sense. There was at least discussion of possible plot points there though, that weren't in the original outline.

posted by infiniteletters at 12:09 am (EST) on Jul 8, 2010

From Google Books
"I played my entire iTunes music library in search of inspiration, staring at its hypnotic ... Robert Anson Heinlein. Half a dozen short mp3 audio clips,"

I can't get it to bring up the full quote, of course. :/

posted by infiniteletters at 11:15 pm (EST) on Jul 7, 2010

Re: your review of Variable Star

I remember Spider saying somewhere in the copy I read that he was stuck for an ending, then a Heinlein lecture came up on his iTunes. The lecture talked about the ideas (and an ending) from that novel outline, so Spider elaborated on that ending to finish the book.

posted by infiniteletters at 11:09 pm (EST) on Jul 7, 2010

I've just seen where you wrote yesterday "I pointed out her punctutation errors because of her stance that she is a fantabulous writer ...". It's just coincidence that I commented on your apostrophe earlier, nothing to do with the ongoing discussions which I'm now catching up on.

posted by jimroberts at 11:15 am (EST) on Jun 24, 2010

In your review of Boy: Tales of Childhood by Roald Dahl you have a misused apostrophe ("the school master's used subtle and not-so-subtle ways"), which is a pity because in other reviews you castigate other people's grammatical and orthographic errors and I wouldn't like to see you accused of inappropriately throwing stones.

posted by jimroberts at 6:50 am (EST) on Jun 24, 2010

Yes, G.A. Hesse did contact me about my review. I noticed that you have a long review of the same book, but I haven't had a chance to read it. Did she contact you as well?

posted by flouncyninja at 10:39 am (EST) on Jun 23, 2010

I don't write reviews anymore because I was once the target of a nasty author (and his friends) that had written a very bad book and then attacked me for reviewing it negatively. I was younger and I decided that writing reviews wasn't worth it. I was intimidated into being quiet.

I don't read certain genres much anymore after that, and when I do, I check out information about the author before I do -- if the author is a jerk to reviewers or fans, I won't buy/read the book.

One of your latest reviews has gathered much attention from the fact that you have quoted the author's own words, which appear trying to intimidate you into silence. Seeing the way you handled the author, and the way in which the person responded has led me to re-think what I think about private messages. I believe you handled the situation with tact and in the best possible informational style.

I believe it is important to know when people are trying to intimidate or silence others for their own gain, and it takes a strong person to call them on their actions, and so for that, I thank you.

And on another note, your reviews are so completely detailed that I feel confident after reading as to whether or not I will like a book! So, double thank you!

posted by kassetra at 2:52 am (EST) on Jun 23, 2010

Hi Storm Raven,
See you are once again at it demolishing a poorly written fantasy.

As such a discerning reader, why do you keep reading stuff from this genre? I pretty much gave up on it once I hit 20 though as a kid I loved LOTR and narnia and all that stuff. You'd enjoy literary fiction a whole lot more, as it is usually much better written with fewer stereotypes and silly tropes.

posted by anna_in_pdx at 5:06 pm (EST) on Jun 22, 2010

Great. Thanks.

Doug

P.S. Wow, you really stay up late.

posted by DouglasE.Richards at 1:01 am (EST) on Jun 19, 2010

Oh, hell. The movie I was thinking of was "Quick Change". Never mind.

posted by Makifat at 2:38 pm (EST) on May 25, 2010

Thanks. I'll stick with the clown/heist movie.

Favorite line,spoken by a shill as Murray walks by a strip club in full clown garb:

"Clowns welcome!"

posted by Makifat at 1:45 pm (EST) on May 25, 2010

"Loose Change"? Do you mean the Bill Murray clown movie?

posted by Makifat at 1:15 pm (EST) on May 25, 2010

Hello there Storm. :)

Just dropping by to say thanks for adding me to your Library of the Interesting-- and such interesting books we have in common! 188, according to my calculations, and of the most varied and delightfully eclectic topics they are. Another sign to me of an Interesting Person, as well as an Interesting Library!

Also, a tip o'the hat to you, sir, for your highly erudite and entertaining reviews. Count me a fan. :)

Much Bliss & Happy Reading,
~~Pandora~~

posted by PandorasRequiem at 7:48 pm (EST) on May 24, 2010

Thanks, friend.

- Bob

posted by AsYouKnow_Bob at 10:48 pm (EST) on May 21, 2010

He'll be clueless as always.

posted by Jesse_wiedinmyer at 11:52 pm (EST) on May 12, 2010

Stormraven -- I've no idea. Thomas McDonough isn't a pseudonym of mine. Perhaps he wrote a book titled "Alien Tongue"? -- after all, titles can't be copyrighted, and there have been numerous instances of different books with the same title.

posted by sleigh at 8:23 am (EST) on May 6, 2010

Congratulations on your review. It has alerted me and others to the unprofessional ethics of Bronwen Publishing. In this age of identity theft they should truly be ashamed of their behavior. I thought you took a great deal of time dealing with the subject matter of the book which alone is enough to prove that you were not being frivolous in posting a negative review. Thank you for the time spent. Sincerely grateful, Mary Beth

posted by mmignano11 at 5:12 pm (EST) on May 2, 2010

I just caught your review on Pureheart and the entire mumbo jumbo following it. I commend you sir, well done! Reviews are meant as a guideline for the reader who is sitting on the fence about a book, and should always be truthful. I much prefer your honesty instead of some flowery made up crap, rely on it, and then purchase a book that I am going to throw at the floor. There are enough excellent books out there to read, so good for you for sifting one worse book from the ones that actually deserve a place in a reader’s hands.

posted by Huge_Horror_Fan at 2:40 pm (EST) on Apr 30, 2010

Just wanted to say I loved your Pureheart review. It's not a book that would have interested me (I was directed to the review by an LT friend who alsom admired it) but I now know for sure to avoid both that book and those publishers. When will these people understand that the only dignified response to unfavourable reviews is silence and the first rule of holes is 'when you're in one, stop digging'? Thanks for the entertainment!

posted by Booksloth at 6:37 am (EST) on Apr 30, 2010

I'm coming very late to the party, but I have just read your review about Pureheart. I think I'll save a copy to remind myself of the importance of truth in reviewing, and the importance of having a backbone. Well done!

posted by JenSay at 10:36 am (EST) on Apr 29, 2010

Brilliant review of Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH, and congrats on it going Hot. It's one of my all-time favorite books from my childhood and your review makes me want to drop everything and reread! :)

posted by wisewoman at 8:09 am (EST) on Apr 21, 2010

You know, I don't think I've mentioned this, but you did a great job summarizing the different types of sci-fi and fantasy awards that are given out. I read it over once awhile ago, but I just re-read it because I recently catalogued a collection of Nebula Award Stories that I have (but haven't read), and your summary really helped me start to understand how the awards work and what their origins and selection processes are. It's nice to not have to resort to trying to look up a bunch of Wikipedia articles for once; it's great to have something a little more reliable. Anyway, good job. :)

posted by Tullius22 at 7:52 pm (EST) on Apr 19, 2010

I had the opportunity to look through your reviews. Not only are you prolific, but I think you did a great service in summarizing all those Analogs and Asimovs -- it would be very hard to get that kind of information without the painstaking summaries you have provided. Congratulations and thank you!

posted by stellarexplorer at 2:19 am (EST) on Mar 23, 2010

Piling-on with thanks for the _PureHeart_ review. I admire the fortitude you demonstrated by actually finishing such an awful book. Also, I was delighted by the detail of the review. Generally, when I read a book that poorly written, I find myself so disgusted I can hardly force myself to specify everything that is wrong with it. The review, certainly, is a wonderful piece of work. You've made my day.

posted by eggsnhm at 11:57 am (EST) on Feb 23, 2010

Loved your "Pureheart" review, good for you for standing your ground. By the way, as an avid reader I put “amateur” reviews on a much higher scale than professional ones (and maybe even part of the majority of readers) – maybe that’s why they got upset.

posted by ZoharLaor at 2:16 pm (EST) on Feb 18, 2010

congratulations on your hot review listed on today's home page!

posted by Whisper1 at 11:07 am (EST) on Feb 17, 2010

Hi there, many thanks for the heads-up about how to post a private comment, which I have now done. I have also deleted the original question I asked the reviewer as I now realise that it was posted inappropriately.
Many thanks
Colin

posted by TSHB at 4:56 am (EST) on Feb 7, 2010

Just dropping by to say that - although I haven't been contributing to those threads - I've been entertained by your current arguments in "Pro and Con (Religion)", and I'm glad you're holding up the side.

Which I guess is a way of saying that "the lurkers support you in email."

posted by AsYouKnow_Bob at 11:18 pm (EST) on Dec 24, 2009

you're welcome =D

The lightning thief is awesome! I didn't know what exactly it is until i found out it's one of my fave genres!

posted by lisa211 at 12:26 am (EST) on Dec 17, 2009

No, but looking into why it was weird on the development server helped me find a problem. It's too bad. Your arguments looked so very much worse without line breaks ;)

posted by timspalding at 12:12 am (EST) on Dec 16, 2009

Non-controversial question: Are you trying to use returns, and they're getting stripped out? Your reply is all running together, and that doesn't look intentional.

posted by timspalding at 10:41 pm (EST) on Dec 15, 2009

RE: that discrepancy

When we got Collections and I created a "Reviewed" collection, I went through my reviews and added those books to it. But I must have missed out a few and, frankly, with nearly 400 reviews I don't feel like going through them all again!

posted by lilithcat at 12:35 am (EST) on Dec 14, 2009

Storm, I just wrote this to Squeaky

QUOTE

I think there is a fault with the logic of your last Comment on review comment. If you are looking at a work, the most recent five reviews are shown at that work page if I have that right, But then you can keep reading all the reviews there. So not just your new reviews that you type, but the reviews that are on the books get read and that is where comments would show.

What the thing to decipher in regards to your post is whether people get to a review of book because they look at all the reviews under the review tab, or they do it by the book.

END QUOTE

But you know I have noticed that the more Zoe keeps ranting on, never compromising, which I think would be a point, the new names in the thread always choose to say they are against this entire idea. I see this whole thing as an uncompromising Zoe who is intransigent and if anyone states their reasons against she says they are wrong and asks them again what valid reason they have for being against it.

David

posted by DWWilkin at 11:19 am (EST) on Dec 13, 2009

Stormraven

Tell me if I was out of line on my last post in our current hell thread...

Thanks

David

posted by DWWilkin at 11:30 pm (EST) on Dec 11, 2009

I am confused as to how a bibliographic citation is an infringement of copyright.

posted by bwilson at 4:52 pm (EST) on Dec 5, 2009

Oops! Yes, cut & paste, and it's fixed now. Thanks for the heads-up!!!

All three books are available on amazon, and the first two are on B&N and other sites as well; those two can also be special ordered by local bookstores. You can also get all three of them through Lulu.com (although they are slower as they don't keep copies on hand).

posted by gwernin at 1:15 pm (EST) on Dec 3, 2009

Stormraven,
The level on LT is so high, sometime intimidatingly so for meager minds like mine.

Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful nod in apology about the tensions on the faith and science topic. Just to be a glutton, I started another. I hope to enforce some limits on the discussion topics such that we do not get off on the Discovery Institute or semantic arguments or 120 year old drawings.

Richard

posted by richardbsmith at 3:55 pm (EST) on Nov 9, 2009

Stormraven,
Appreciate the aside. Its all good. I have watched in bewilderment the Discovery Institute on television. It is obvious even to me that their conclusions are predetermined and their methods lack rigor. I am surprised to see their conclusions so adamantly argued on LT.

Evolution is not a big deal to me. I was shocked to see it so emphasized here, when I joined LT. It is just another science.

I had wondered why the scientists on LT did not jump in to counter Oakes on the Evolution thread in the Conservative group. Soon after joining LT, when I mentioned some concerns adn questions about what I understood were evolutionary principles, I was slammed on all sides. Oakes seemed to get by with little objection.

It may be that I better understand now their quiet wrt answering his comments.

Still though I have ignored the topic. Y'all have at it. :)

posted by richardbsmith at 1:04 pm (EST) on Nov 9, 2009

I appreciate your tagging award winners. I didn't know about several of them, so thanks for the information! I see that I have a L O N G way to go to get up to speed in science fiction. It's a relatively new passion, so if I live long enough, maybe I'll get there!
Peggy

posted by LizzieD at 10:38 pm (EST) on Sep 23, 2009

Thanks for helping hold the line on homeopathy in the "Misconceptions" thread.

posted by daschaich at 11:34 pm (EST) on Sep 10, 2009

I am getting the biggest kick out of your "Pureheart" review getting a frequent airing in the #1 hot review spot. There should be some kind of LT prize for the highest number of thumbs-up on a review. The Rocky Horror Picture Show of reviews, with its own cult following. What a hoot!

posted by tiffin at 4:57 pm (EST) on Aug 19, 2009

I've added you to my interesting libraries list. Looks like a good place to get ideas for future reading!

posted by calm at 8:03 am (EST) on Aug 11, 2009

Hail StormRaven! Never mind the pirate costume - you need tights and a cape for your new superhero persona! Truth, justice and grammatical writing!

I sorely needed the laughs I got from reading all the addenda to your PureHeart review. The best part is that none of your unworthy adversaries have any inkling of what nitwits they are.

posted by stringcat3 at 1:43 am (EST) on Jun 11, 2009

Just read your "PureHeart" review (and the kerfuffle which followed). Your review was an absolute hoot. Loved it! Consider yourself thumbed for the review itself and for the principle of freedom of speech.
Tiffin

posted by tiffin at 6:32 pm (EST) on Jun 4, 2009

A tip about Also on and Blogger: Instead of putting your username, go to your profile and copy the string of numbers at the end of the URL. That's how I did it, and I think it worked for me.

Also, can't believe the whole PureHeart issue. Do these people know what you do for a living?

posted by jigj119 at 2:20 pm (EST) on Jun 1, 2009

I found your review of PureHeart from the "Stars and stinkers" thread in the ER group. It takes a very special reviewer to freak out an author, Publishing House AND back-cover blurb writer with a single review! Good for you, and keep fighting the good fight. :)

posted by spacecommuter at 7:03 pm (EST) on May 24, 2009

Just dropping in to say that, as someone who was also forced to read Pureheart, you are my hero. Awesome review!

posted by RebeccaAnn at 10:34 pm (EST) on May 13, 2009

I just have to say I love your review of Pureheart, it is priceless, so I had to have you as a friend here. Thank you

posted by KeithFowler at 2:18 pm (EST) on May 11, 2009

Enjoyed "the" review! It's so funny when people brandish degrees to prove that even when they write rubbish it's educated rubbish!
BTW one more criticism - Lilith was never an angel, and people and angels are NOT interchangable (it annoys me so much when people think they are...)
Best wishes
GG

posted by Goldengrove at 7:35 am (EST) on May 11, 2009

I decided to ask Amazon to confirm that my review was never posted to their site. I sent this inquiry to Amazon customer service:

A publishing company has been distributing my personal information. When contacted, they said they got my personal information from a review they allege I posted on Amazon (and that they allege was subsequently removed from the site). The only trouble is, I have never posted any reviews of any kind on Amazon. Is there any way to check and see if there is any record of a review posted for the book Pureheart published by Bronwen Publishing under my name? I know I didn't post a review for that book here, but I would like confirmation from your office in order to combat their claims that I did.

I got this response (links removed for convenience):

Thank you for contacting Amazon.com.

I apologize for the inconvenience. I did search our reviews and I do not find any reviews submitted by this account.

Should you need any further assistance from us, please use this link to write back to us:

(Link removed)

I hope this helps.

Please let us know if this e-mail resolved your question:

(Links removed)

Please note: this e-mail was sent from an address that cannot accept incoming e-mail.

To contact us about an unrelated issue, please visit the Help section of our web site.

Best regards,

Patric
Amazon.com
We're Building Earth's Most Customer-Centric Company

So now they have been caught by their lies. It seems pretty obvious that they have been caught handing out my personal information, and then making up a transparent lie. I have sent this information to Tim and Abby. We'll see what develops.

posted by StormRaven at 2:58 pm (EST) on May 10, 2009

Dude,

If LT had a button on your page I could click on called "Add to heroes," I'd click on it in a heartbeat. Keep those nads of steel locked and loaded!

Best,
Brent

posted by EnriqueFreeque at 8:07 pm (EST) on May 9, 2009

Bronwen Publishing has finally officially weighed in. Of course, they continue to lie their behind off. Here is the message they posted to my profile, once again violating the terms of the giveaway program, as you can see:

YOUR REVIEW WAS ABSOLUTELY POSTED ON AMAZON.COM, YOUR REAL NAME IS AARON *****, AND YOU PUT YOUR ENTIRE EMAIL ADDRESS ON THERE. SEVERAL PEOPLE NOW HAVE IT. YOUR REVIEW WAS SO BAD AMAZON TOOK IT OFF, AND THEY USUALLY NEVER DO THAT. SO THERE'S NO USE TRYING TO LIE AND SAY YOU NEVER PUT YOUR REVIEW ON THERE. WE HAVE A COPY OF IT, SIGNED BY YOU WITH YOUR AOL.COM EMAIL ADDRESS. NOW HOW DID WE GET THAT, DO YOU THINK? LIBRARY THING HAS FLAGGED IT, TOO. GOOD FOR THEM. NO MORE LIES AND SILLY, JUVENILE REVIEWS. IF YOU DON'T LIKE A BOOK, YOU DON'T LIKE IT. NO PROFESSIONAL REVIEWER WOULD DO WHAT YOU DID, ONLY AN AMATEUR REVIEWER. GROW UP!

First off, note that they can't seem to figure out how to not shout online, and apparently have some trouble with the proper use of the shift key. Second, note that they once again decided to hand out my actual name, though they aren't supposed to (I redacted my last name to post this here). They wonder how they got my aol e-mail address, but since I e-mailed the review directly to them at their request that should be obvious to anyone with two firing neurons. If, as they say, "several people now have" my review and e-mail address, they handed it to them.

I never put my review on Amazon. I have, in fact, never posted a review on Amazon. That much is fact. If anyone put it on Amazon, it had to be LibraryThing, which I seriouslly doubt, or Bronwen Publishing themselves, which seems silly. The persistence they have shown in keeping up with this transparent lie is pretty amazing. I also note that Bronwen Publishing doesn't seem to understand how the flagging system on LibraryThing works.

They didn't actually challenge the accuracy of my review - and the simple reason for that is that they cannot. Everything I said about the book is true. They resort to a vague and baseless claim that I have somehow lied and assert that my review of the awful garbage that they have printed is "juvenile". I leave it to the reader to evaluate who is actually "juvenile" here.

posted by StormRaven at 7:02 pm (EST) on May 9, 2009

Bitchen PH review.

posted by EnriqueFreeque at 4:57 pm (EST) on May 8, 2009

Read you review of Pureheart: no need to be defensive over what that graceless arse Isaacs wrote to you. Nil carborundum!

Oh yeah: Why are pirates cool? Because they Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

posted by kevmalone at 11:53 am (EST) on May 8, 2009

:D Your review of PureHeart had me cracking up. Thanks for the morning giggle!!

posted by makaiju at 11:38 am (EST) on May 7, 2009

Just passing by from Talk.

I applaud your effort to review all your books, I've enjoyed (even if not always totally agreed with) many of the reviews you've written so far, only another 4000 odd to go! I too am trying to review everything I own, but have a slighty easier task!

Given that our tastes are fairly similar in at least some of the genres, I'll be curious to see how you feel about CJ Cherryh and Janny Wurts when you get around to reviewing them.

Keep reading
Fox

posted by reading_fox at 9:18 am (EST) on May 6, 2009

I guess I struck a nerve with my review of the terrible trash that is PureHeart. Clark Isaacs decided to send me a response in my personal e-mail - not even having the courage to make his response public. His e-mail, by the way, was titled "Your left wing comments have no foundation!", which just gets tossed into the pile of incomprehensible statements flowing from him. Anyway, here is what he wrote to me:

"Isn't it interesting that you would write a review and slam a work which you would not have the courage or imagination to pen yourself.

Yes, I am an uneducated oaf with only three degrees which you did not bother to ask about or check out.

If you would have bothered to ask, I did not get paid for the review which was published on the cover of the book and will be published in several newspapers.

Poor old Ezra Pound would turn over in his grave if he knew that distant kin of his was pounding sand!

How many books have you written? Do you know what it takes to put your heart and soul into a story?

Because you are spewing such loggerhead and incomprehensible diatribe only shows your truly not a man of God. Turn the other cheek!"

I don't care how many degrees Mr. Issacs has, nor do they matter. What matters is that his blurb of a review is rife with lousy grammar and incompehensible sentences. Further, it glowingly praises a truly putrid book. If he has three degrees, it is obvious that none of them required the ability to write coherently. Here's his "review":

"Demons, witches, and Angels from God abound on earth in fury {sic} battles. The conclusion will make you a believer that the main character of PUREHEART is a champion in all sense {sic} of the word. Jack, a Boston terrier, and his sister Scout bring to life a story that revolves around the nether world and other unearthly creatures which are swiftly dispatched. A thrilling read which will have you longing for more. J.K. Rowling, move over, Rita Hsu Syers has arrived."

Note the grammar, which would flunk a fifth grade class. In addition to the errors I noted, look at the misuse of commas: there should be one after "his sister Scout" and there shouldn't be one after J.K. Rowling". Are the demons, witches and angels all from God? There is also the bizarre construction of "the nether world and other unearthly creatures which are swiftly dispatched". Is the nether world swiftly dispatched? Is the nether world an unearthly creature? What newspaper would accept such semi-literate work?

He resorts to the ancient and completely bankrupt canard that those who have not written a book cannot therefore review them, which is just as silly as his contention that J.K. Rowling should move over to make room for Syers. It doesn't matter if you pour your heart and soul into something if the end result is terrible. The end result of Syers' efforts is laughably bad. I'd compare it to The Eye of Argon, but that would be insulting to The Eye of Argon, which is at least funny.

He says he wasn't paid for the review, yet there is no other way to explain his fondness for this piece of awfulness. My review was, if anything, too kind to PureHeart.

posted by StormRaven at 1:54 pm (EST) on May 5, 2009

You wrote an excellent and informed review of Samuel R. Delaney's novel "Nova" in my opinion. And I haven't even read it, so thank you for the encouragement to put it closer to the top of the pile!

posted by psybre at 6:01 pm (EST) on Apr 16, 2009

Hi

I just noticed you on TadAD's thread and thought I'd visit. Tad is helping me learn to navigate in the roiling waters of science fiction and fantasy this year--I'm rather a newbie at it, and I noticed you had a lot of those two categories, so I thought I might look around. You also have a lot of information on your profile page--love the explanations of the awards--some I recognized but others, like Locus, I hadn't heard of.

I have to go out tonight for a while so I will have to browse your library later. I hope you rate your books so I can get some ideas of what to try!

Carolyn

posted by MusicMom41 at 8:05 pm (EST) on Apr 10, 2009

no matter how sensible and reasonable your explanations, i doubt you'll ever convince cyops of anything. I don't know if he's the author or not (tho i rather think he MUST be), but he's self-absorbed as all get out and is thriving on the attention we're all giving him, i think.

As an epidemiologist in my day job, i thought about modeling the "response frequency" on the fefifofum thread w. the standard logistic curve. And then said fkit.

posted by bobmcconnaughey at 9:56 pm (EST) on Feb 19, 2009