We're not talking 'immersion in the genre' here, we're talking about having read a couple of fantasy novels in the last ten years.
So, if you read Magic For Beginners, and wondered whether the zombies were metaphorical, then that would be OK? Or if Dan did it? Or even, heaven forfend, if I did it? But a guy who reviews book for a living - well, he's *obviously* never going to have read *any* fantasy novels in his life before ever, and therefore he's not allowed to ponder if the book has hidden depths that aren't immediately apparent. OK, I think I understand The Rules now.
he seems completely oblivious to the idea that there might be other ways to understand the book than his own
Did we just read the same review? The one where he asked the questions? The one where he wrote "those zombies -- are they supposed to be a metaphor?" and "ordinary household items start turning up haunted. Literally. (Maybe.)" and "Maybe the rabbit got bigger. Maybe the whole thing is his imagination. Who knows?". You know, the review where he clearly indicates several different possible interpretations of the prose? We did both read that one, yes?
no subject
So, if you read Magic For Beginners, and wondered whether the zombies were metaphorical, then that would be OK? Or if Dan did it? Or even, heaven forfend, if I did it? But a guy who reviews book for a living - well, he's *obviously* never going to have read *any* fantasy novels in his life before ever, and therefore he's not allowed to ponder if the book has hidden depths that aren't immediately apparent. OK, I think I understand The Rules now.
he seems completely oblivious to the idea that there might be other ways to understand the book than his own
Did we just read the same review? The one where he asked the questions? The one where he wrote "those zombies -- are they supposed to be a metaphor?" and "ordinary household items start turning up haunted. Literally. (Maybe.)" and "Maybe the rabbit got bigger. Maybe the whole thing is his imagination. Who knows?". You know, the review where he clearly indicates several different possible interpretations of the prose? We did both read that one, yes?