Savage: Review by Teddypig

Well. Ouch. But in the effort of fairness I’m posting all the reviews, not just the good ones. Too bad, as I was really excited Teddypig was going to review it as he’s a level of cool I’ll never reach.

If anyone needs me I’ll be here staring bitterly at the cut last chapter that tied up all the loose ends. Actually I’ll be in London… conducting research. *smirk*

Here you go: TEDDYPIGS’S REVIEW AT THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UNREAD.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Savage: Review by Teddypig

  1. Now come on! I even compared you to my first love Andre Norton. Your writing rocks hard.

    I had to be honest, I just hated the ending.
    But… I love your writing and if some editor had you cut anything I will kick their ass.

  2. From The Dean’s Desk:
    My dear Ms DuBois kindly pay no attention to the teddypig person.

    The Dena has replied on your behalf:

    From The Dean’s Desk:
    The Dean is concerned that perhaps the reviewer did not actually read all of the text but only skimmed for the sex bits. If only the reviewer had actually bothered to read and understand the strand of cultural identity that Ms. DuBois was setting up, the ethnocentric comments leveled regarding what are clearly cultural norms and activities would have been either set in context or eliminated.
    The Dean finds it annoying when authors work hard to not play to western European stereotypes, are then rebuked by those who cannot carry their scholarship out of the classroon and into some actual application. Ms DuBois is to be commended for consciously side stepping the problem that many writers commit when they impose current time and culture- specific norms of morality and conduct onto what is clearly a storyline that is not.

    The dialogue is intense and necessary for plot points (as opposed to just getting characters to the next sex scene), the imagry is detailed and rich, the editing smooth and useful, and the cover acceptable, although not at the level of Forbidden. The Dean was more than satisfied with this offering and was left with no unanswered questions.

    The Dean suggests that the reviewer perhaps confine himself to those genres with which he is familiar (and apparently only comfortable) with the conventions of the genre. On the other hand, perhaps actual scholarship should be applied in order to broaden the reviewer’s literary base. The Dean suggests the collected works of Niven, Brandbury, and other actual masters of science fiction.

  3. Teddypig- I’m deeply flattered at the comparison. Thanks for reviewing it! Feel free to hurt my editor. Her name is Kate. K-a-t-e.

    The Dean- Thanks for the vote of confidence. Though I hardly think I deserve a comparison to the masters at this point.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s