Strange Horizons Reviews
Feb. 7th, 2006 09:04 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Having pimped Vector, it's time to pimp the Strange Horizons reviews section (
sh_reviews). This week so far: Martin Lewis reviews Life on Mars:
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-syndicated.gif)
This has to be the Doctor Who effect: you wait ages for the BBC to produce a science fiction programme and then two come along at once. As well as Hyperdrive, a Red Dwarf-aping sitcom, they are also currently showing Life On Mars, a genre spin on the format that's the bread and butter of networks the world over: the police procedural. It's safe to say, though, that Doctor Who never contained the phrase "I don't give a tart's furry cup."More controversially, yesterday Liz Henry reviewed Touched by Venom:
From the snarking frenzy that consumed the blogosphere in the wake of last year's World Fantasy Convention, I expected Janine Cross's first novel, Touched by Venom, to be a badly written, laughable book. Something on the order of Slave Women of Gor, perhaps, or at best, those trashtastic Sharon Green soft-porn books about blood-drinking Amazonian women who ride around on giant lizards and rape men in their spare time. My reaction to the bad reviews went a bit like this: "OMG, sex with dragons, guys with dragon-viagra hardons, probably so bad it's funny, I must read it!"Responses to that one so far spotted here, here (Cheryl Morgan, who thinks it's a thoughtful review), and here (Nick Mamatas, who thinks reviews has hit a new low).
So I did. To my surprise, I found a thoughtful, enjoyable work of feminist speculative fiction. It is a woman's hero-tale, the story of a survivor; a true dystopian fantasy, and one written with an awareness of non-Western cultures.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-07 11:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-07 11:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-07 04:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-07 05:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-07 06:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-07 06:18 pm (UTC)has helped to convince me, but I'm not one to be shocked by female circumcision (read 'Temple of my Familiar' after all).
Could be approaching from a personal perspective here, but I'm left wondering why the editor was criticised for letting a typo slip in (and nothing else? Actually I'd point fingers at the marketing department for the rest of the book, the editor may have worked wonders here. And to be fair, the marketing department chose a good book here - look how it's being discussed, even defended, by people who haven't actually read it!)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-08 03:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-08 04:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-08 07:01 am (UTC)