Tagged with books

You know you're a book geek/librarian/dork when you're constantly distracted from a text with the thought, "Did anyone proofread this thing?" You get the feeling that the editors at Harper & Row threw up their hands at some point and didn't give a fuck about getting the name Alfred E. Neuman right or fixing a mistaken "know" for "now," and didn't have the fortitude for copy editing either, since the narrative frequently bounces off the rail (billiards reference). Aside from my criticism of how the book was produced (seriously, I wouldn't have released a book in that condition if I were a publisher, but I guess since Roseanne was big money in 1989 they didn't care), I did enjoy reading it.

Books in the Hollows series are always compelling. In this latest entry, though, I felt like someone had told the author that she needed to work on the romance angle, so there's a half-hearted, poorly executed push-pull between our heroine, the witch demon and the elf who has been her nemesis since the first book, if I remember correctly. I do like that Rachel's love interests are always flawed, in a way that can't be brushed aside.

I have a soft spot for librarian fiction, but a distaste for Gale Cengage Learning, which in addition to the crime of being a library conglomerate responsible for some overpriced electronic resources with crappy interfaces, has published at least one other librarian penned title in its Five Star genre fiction imprint.

I read this book. It is the autobiography of a pioneering distance runner who broke down barriers for women athletes. It is very good. I am sick right now and can't offer more than that.