May 2014: Edmund Cooper: All Fools Day

[Polly Parrot]

Discussion starts May 1st.

 

[MrHill]

i shall read it as soon as i have finished my current book

 

[Conscious Bob]

I'm in.

 

[Roxbrough]

i shall read it as soon as i have finished my current book

I am certain you will enjoy it.

 

[Conscious Bob]

As I kicked off the discussion last month (such as it was...) I've waited for someone else to start the discussion here, looks like it's not going to happen. I've saved a couple of quid so it's not all bad.

 

[Peder]

According to Amazon, it looks like the book was published in 1981 and now commands a hefty price.
A reviewer there mentions a "retro British sci-fi feel" to it. Maybe so, and maybe it was precursor to many post-apocalyptic scenes and stories to follow. Which might explain why, by now, it felt very derivative to me and not particularly imaginative -- gangs on the loose and fighting it out -- with a sudden and abruptly undeveloped ending to boot. It just didn't do it for me. A connoisseur of the genre, on the other hand, can no doubt write a better appreciation, which I would be glad to read. Anyone?

 

[Conscious Bob]

A reviewer there mentions a "retro British sci-fi feel" to it. Maybe so, and maybe it was precursor to many post-apocalyptic scenes and stories to follow. Which might explain why, by now, it felt very derivative to me and not particularly imaginative -- gangs on the loose and fighting it out -- with a sudden and abruptly undeveloped ending to boot. It just didn't do it for me.

It was a good idea to save my cash then, at least according to that glowing review.

A connoisseur of the genre, on the other hand, can no doubt write a better appreciation, which I would be glad to read. Anyone?

Why would you be glad to read an appreciation of a book you don't like?

 

[Peder]

Why would you be glad to read an appreciation of a book you don't like?

Many reasons, Bob.
1. I prefer forums that have BOTM discussions, and keeping a BOTM going is a collaborative effort that takes some effort by all concerned. I think it is only common courtesy to read contributions to a forum where one has contributed, and to reply to relevant posts. After all, discussions can only happen when people post and share views.

2. General interest. Not everyone may share my view and I'd be interested to hear their views. They might easily see features of the book that I overlooked.

3. There is more to a book than just a story, and more to having an opinion than just "I liked it," or "I didn't like it." Books have characters, events, settings, times, authors, written styles, contexts, literary significance, and so forth, any or all of which might deserve comment. For example, the book is set in post-apocalyptic England. Perhaps the final confrontation at the bridge might have more significance for the British reader than for me. Was there a bridge battle at Hastings? Was the leader reminiscent of a famous historical personage? Or so on.

4. There can be more to discussion than just a thumbs up or down. Perhaps the book originated a new theme -- the first of its kind, a breakout success. Or not. Perhaps the author has a particular stature in sci-fi. Or not. Or is it just a standard pot-boiler, or not?

5. It might have positive/negative features that would lead to a recommendation to read it. Or not. Or to a star rating of some level.

These things can only be learned by reading posts with their viewpoints.

So, again, anyone?

 

[Conscious Bob]

Many reasons, Bob.
1. I prefer forums that have BOTM discussions, and keeping a BOTM going is a collaborative effort that takes some effort by all concerned. I think it is only common courtesy to read contributions to a forum where one has contributed, and to reply to relevant posts. After all, discussions can only happen when people post and share views.

Well said from a dedicated reader that replies to a bump twenty one days in...

2. General interest. Not everyone may share my view and I'd be interested to hear their views. They might easily see features of the book that I overlooked.

Hearing views is fine but this is meant to be a discussion.

3. There is more to a book than just a story, and more to having an opinion than just "I liked it," or "I didn't like it." Books have characters, events, settings, times, authors, written styles, contexts, literary significance, and so forth, any or all of which might deserve comment. For example, the book is set in post-apocalyptic England. Perhaps the final confrontation at the bridge might have more significance for the British reader than for me. Was there a bridge battle at Hastings? Was the leader reminiscent of a famous historical personage? Or so on.

Well said but it doesn't stand up to reality, you posted that you were disappointed with last month's BOTM and that as it turned out signalled the end of your participation.

4. There can be more to discussion than just a thumbs up or down. Perhaps the book originated a new theme -- the first of its kind, a breakout success. Or not. Perhaps the author has a particular stature in sci-fi. Or not. Or is it just a standard pot-boiler, or not?

Of course.

5. It might have positive/negative features that would lead to a recommendation to read it. Or not. Or to a star rating of some level.

Couldn't agree more

These things can only be learned by reading posts with their viewpoints.

Yada yada.

So, again, anyone?

By saying that are you participating or inviting others to waste time, remember it's a discussion.

 

[Peder]

You are right, Bob, that my comments on the last two books have been minimal.
I have deliberately refrained from detailed justifications for my negative opinions because it is my experience, through many book discussions on a number of forums, that negative comments are not generally liked. Flourishing book discussions in my experience generally occur among groups of people with broadly similar and positive thoughts about books that they have generally liked. Injecting negative comments always runs the risk of angering someone and starting arguments. Some people get very angry when they simply hear a thought different than their own, seeming to regard negative comments about the book as negative personal attacks on them. I thought my comments in both cases, though brief, did indicate my reasons for my reactions to the books.

Regarding your final statement -- about wasting time, and reminding me that it is a discussion --I miss your point. Anyone is free to respond as they wish, or not.

Regarding your "yada, yada," no comment. See previous.

 

[Conscious Bob]

You are right, Bob, that my comments on the last two books have been minimal.
I have deliberately refrained from detailed justifications for my negative opinions because it is my experience, through many book discussions on a number of forums, that negative comments are not generally liked. Flourishing book discussions in my experience generally occur among groups of people with broadly similar and positive thoughts about books that they have generally liked. Injecting negative comments always runs the risk of angering someone and starting arguments. Some people get very angry when they simply hear a thought different than their own, seeming to regard negative comments about the book as negative personal attacks on them. I thought my comments in both cases, though brief, did indicate my reasons for my reactions to the books.

For a book discussion to flourish there first of all has to be a discussion. For instance you didn't like February 14 BOTM Maria V. Snyder's Poison Study but that didn't stop you giving more a more detailed explanation of your dislike by reply. Regarding this thread we both know that if I hadn't bumped it you wouldn't have said anything at all. There's nothing wrong with not liking a book just don't pretend you're interested in the discussion.

Regarding your final statement -- about wasting time, and reminding me that it is a discussion --I miss your point. Anyone is free to respond as they wish, or not.

In your case 'or not'...

Regarding your "yada, yada," no comment. See previous.

That was just my general affirmation of one of your minor points.

 

[Peder]

Bob, There is nothing pretend about any part of my attitude.

And who, might I add, are you to lecture others on proper behavior? Are you the new moderator?

You who, up above, were "I'm in." and who have now "saved a few quid" by not buying the book.

Please save your posturing as hero and savior of the forum for other venues where your previous posts cannot be seen.

 

[Conscious Bob]

There were no on topic posts relating to the story and that's why I decided not to buy the book.

As for proper behaviour all I'm doing is pointing out that you have discussed your negative opinions before so your deliberate refrained approach is a fairly recent development.

Although this discussion has been off topic I've enjoyed it, pretty good value as well.

 

[Roxbrough]

It would seem that the average member in this forum plays silly little pointless games with song titles etc etc, as apposed to actually reading.
A shame, because they are missing out on a good read.
Before I'm banned for actually having an oppinion let me remind you all that this forum had far more interesting discussions before member and Raspunsul were dispensed with for that very same reason.

 

[Polly Parrot]

It would seem that the average member in this forum plays silly little pointless games with song titles etc etc, as apposed to actually reading.
A shame, because they are missing out on a good read.
Before I'm banned for actually having an oppinion let me remind you all that this forum had far more interesting discussions before member and Raspunsul were dispensed with for that very same reason.

Neither member nor Raspunsul have been banned. The former left on his own accord, I have no idea what happened to Raspunsul.

I don't see why you should be banned for "having an opinion".

 

[Conscious Bob]

Neither member nor Raspunsul have been banned. The former left on his own accord, I have no idea what happened to Raspunsul.

I don't see why you should be banned for "having an opinion".

Heh, Oh they were banned all right along with one significant other but not from here. The moral is don't mess with the Womens Institute...

 

[Conscious Bob]

Actually that should be two significant others.