argross at bigpond.net.au
Mon Apr 14 08:48:11 EDT 2003
> I felt a bit like I wanted to read somebody else's version of the story-
> seems to spend less time on the interesting ideas than I'd like, or
> something- I usually like it when things are referred to in passing and
> spelt out, it gives it depth, but I don't think this was fleshed out
> DWJ's take on the Hours would be much cooler!
As I said, I'm only halfway through, but I think I know what you mean. It's
fascinating, but something is annoying me about it. Maybe I'll be able to
explain why when I'm finished. But I think you might be on the right track.
I keep thinking that Barker is missing what's really important, or the
narration is too obvious, not roundabout, the way DWJ would do it. Maybe the
story line is too linear, too straightforward, whereas DWJ would approach it
from interesting oblique angles. Then again, the way DWJ writes isn't the
only way to approach narration. The book is probably suffering in my eyes
for my having begun it immediately after reading her.
To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at suberic.net with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at http://suberic.net/dwj/list/
More information about the Dwj