Entry tags:

Decoupaging the text from the wrong perspective?
A blogger buys a used, beat-up copy of Anne Rice's Pandora, ends up not liking it, and decides to get crafty with it. (Well, she also says, "Don’t be mad at me, even if Pandora really is one of the worst Anne Rice novels then it’s still better written than Twilight. Just not by as much as you think.")

Anne Rice finds out.

Anne Rice links to the blog on her Facebook.

You know what happens next.

HOW DARE YOU EVEN COMPARE SHITTY ASS STEPHANIE MEYER TO THE QUALITY WORK THAT IS ANNE RICE HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU FUCKING HAG, I HOPE YOU GET HERPES

INSANE. To destroy a book like that is honestly the most disrespectful, idiotic thing anyone could ever do. An opinion is an opinion, but to do that… loved the rich descriptive narrative and historical context and character development (the other reason I read them).

Disgraceful.

This review is garbage. If you get this emotional then you are not reviewing a book, you are having a mental breakdown. I am left wondering not what is not right about the novel by Anne Rice, but what is mentally wrong with the [next comment] Person who wrote this tripe of a review.

“I couldn’t simply write my opinion I had to be a destructive little shit aren’t i awesome?”

ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED - GODWIN'S LAW:

"Jose": My dear: Even if you dont like a book i dont get why you have to destroy it, Nazi memories perhaps?

Miss Articulate, the OP: The book was dying anyway, it would have been thrown away if I’d given it to a charity shop and I clearly underestimated the offense people would take. Relating it to Nazi’s is incredibly disrespectful to what people went through during WW2, including my own family so please don’t throw that around. Thanks for the comment.

Jose: It’s merely stating that destroying books is one of the things Nazis did, why get so personal? I respected your apology for offence caused, but that is yet another petty, attention-seeking remark. Did anyone refer to the other horrors the Nazis did? No. Therefore your response is irrelevant.

And there's so much more where that came from.

ETA from sandglass: "The Facebook link itself is worth looking at, too. Rice is replying to comments as well."

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

stardust_rain
2013-05-02 06:50 am UTC (link)

I started with Prisoner of Azkaban in the HP series. And if I started reading Discworld with Colour of Magic or The Light Fantastic I never would've given it another chance.

I read Moving Pictures first, but wasn't impressed, then Jingo first a few years later and was hooked. Then Men At Arms, then Feet of Clay, Night Watch, Thud!, Fifth Elephant and Snuff...in that order. STILL haven't finished Guards! Guards!, even though I started ages ago.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

adverb
2013-05-02 09:26 am UTC (link)

So agreed on Discworld. I actually started with Colour of Magic, got about ten pages in and put it down (I still haven't read it). I liked the writing style, though, so I picked up Wyrd Sisters a while later. I enjoyed the witches books and started making my way slowly through them, interspersed with some of the stand-alones. And then I came across Men At Arms, and I read all the of the Night's Watch books that were out then in less than a week.

(I pretty much only reread Vimes books and Moist von Lipwig books now.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	beccastareyes 2013-05-04 05:58 am UTC (link)
	Heck, when I was starting reading Discworld, most of the earlier books were not in print in the States, so I started with Interesting Times and just went with it. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -