Interesting links have opinions.

[hawkwing_lb]

Genreville on In Praise of the Implausible:

Ng’s orchids are implausible. They’re also beautiful. I think we need more startling beauty in our speculative fiction, more giggling, more wonder. And plausibility is in the eye of the beholder, too; after visiting lush, tropical Singapore, where enormous plants really do grow practically overnight, I find Ng’s imagery only a step or two removed from reality, whereas if I’d never left the northeastern U.S. I would struggle much more with the idea. As Western SF/F publishers become more aware of their diverse audiences, they also need to realize that catering to one culture’s idea of “plausible” is just as restrictive as saying that protagonists need to be white English-speaking men.

Icky sexist "epic fantasy pin-up calendar" organised by Rothfuss &co. The male gaze reigns triumphant, and the female gaze is ignored. Sigh.


Some sadly wrong soul with a blog is wrong about the purpose of book reviews on the internet:

A professionally-written, legitimate review should not feature the reviewer's personal opinions. In fact, I would personally go so far as to say that personal opinion - when it does not address the technical merits of the book that influence reader comprehension - should never enter into it at all. No reader gives a damn - nor should they - what the reviewer thinks about the theme.

A portrait of someone frightened by intellectual integrity and popular/democratic discourse? Someone who thinks the only point of a review is to sell/notsell books? Alas for them.


Have some excellent volcano pictures.


And happy birthday, etumukutenyak.

Comments

[hawkwing-lb.livejournal.com]

No, there's something wrong with them. *waves at sexism*

A professionally-written, legitimate review should not feature the reviewer's personal opinions

HAHAHAHAHA

I know, right? You just have to laugh. Sputter, and laugh.

And thank you. It's always excellent to hear someone gets something out of them. :)