Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 16:45:22 -0500
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
From: Judith Newton <jnewton at ashcomp.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Book of the Year....?
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

Amazing.  I agree with Bill: the Regency prose couldn't sustain all those
pages - and the long stretches where NOTHING HAPPENED.  But I have to admit
it got better towards the end; if the pace of the last 1/3 of the book had
been sustained in the first 2/3, it would be a great read.

Where have all the great editors gone?

Judy

P.S. I thought the footnotes were fun, but ultimately pointless.

At 01:25 PM 12/30/2004, you wrote:
>Then they must have read a better version than I did.  It was ok.  That =
>is
>the best I can give it.  It didn't flow well and the overabundance of
>footnoted stories, while sometimes amusing, took away from the main =
>story.
>If it was a great book I would have flown threw the 700+ pages as it =
>was, it
>took me over two weeks to trudge through.  But that is just my opinion.
>
>Bill Lawhorn=20
>Bureau of Labor Statistics=20
>Office of Occupational Statistics and Employment Projections=20
>2 Massachusetts Ave., NE, Room 2135=20
>Washington, DC=A0 20212=20
>Phone:=A0 (202) 691-5093
>Fax: (202) 691-5700
>Email: Lawhorn.william at bls.gov=20
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Walsh [mailto:MJW at press.jhu.edu]=20
>Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 1:24 PM
>To: bwsmof at bwsmof.org; WSFAlist at WSFA.org
>Subject: [WSFA] Book of the Year....?
>
>Well, according to Time it's....
>
>Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
><http://www.time.com/time/bestandworst/2004/books.html>
>
>mjw