Links Are Not A Violent Subject

6 thoughts on “Links Are Not A Violent Subject

  1. Posts I will write when I have time: a comparison of the endings of Pan’s Labyrinth and The Science of Sleep.

    I wanted to address this in my Pan’s review, but it seemed to fall a bit outside the scope. There’s a lot there, though.

  2. I thought that Audrey Niffenger review was rather good, especially “Now, you may be thinking, I don’t like science fiction. … Get over it. This isn’t exactly science fiction (it’s not exactly not science fiction either).” I think that places Niffenger amongst those who aren’t ashamed of being seen as sf writers (though reading it again, perhaps I’m being too generous).

    I suspect that Susanna Clarke link may expire in the next few hours.

  3. It’s a perfectly decent review, although I don’t think Niffenegger’s statements re: sf are part of why, per se. I don’t know, I just have this nebulous sense that it might have been interesting to see a review by someone who wasn’t quite so obviously sympatico with Link’s concerns, and an even more nebulous sense that a British reviewer might have fit the bill. (Imagine if they’d given Gwyneth Jones Magic for Beginners and Audrey Niffenegger Ink, for instance.)

  4. (Imagine if they’d given Gwyneth Jones Magic for Beginners and Audrey Niffenegger Ink, for instance.)

    Or Dan Hartland all the sf Years’ Bests!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s