To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.funOpen lugnet.off-topic.fun in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Fun / 1046
1045  |  1047
Subject: 
Re: Fair use of lugnet.cad.dat
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.fun
Date: 
Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:43:23 GMT
Reply-To: 
jsproat@geocities.comSTOPSPAMMERS
Viewed: 
2275 times
  
"Christopher L. Weeks" wrote:
> I was really disappointed with it.  _LOH_ was so good - their best in my
> opinion - and _BC_ degraded to a kind of cheezy romance in a SF setting.

Cheezy romance is an appropriate description.  When the reader was given a
play-by-play description of the hero's teen-age daughter's *legs* in running
motion, twenty pages into the book, it set a tone that should've rather
stayed in the authors' fevered little minds.

But the politics and in-fighting described were, to me, realistic and worth
the read.

> I guess maybe it was better than that, but only just.  The only thing
> about that book that engaged me was the smart (uh...what were they
> called...brainfart) amphibian that is the mature samlon.

Grendels!  I love them!  Gimme three -- no, four!  With *strong* leashes.

I also like the veldt scribes (whatever they're called).  I would love to
fly over a field they've grazed in and looked at the patterns left behind.

Cheers,
- jsproat

--
Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@geocities.com>
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Horizon/5249/
"The world will not perish for want of wonders but for want of wonder"
-- British scientist J. B. S. Haldane (1892-1964)



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Fair use of lugnet.cad.dat
 
(...) Yeah! (Duh...) (...) I liked those too. Imaginitive macrofauna is always good. When I was thinking about the book earlier for that post, I didn't recall them at all, just the bees on crystal meth that I thought were kind of boring. (28 years ago, 2-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Fair use of lugnet.cad.dat
 
(...) I was really disappointed with it. _LOH_ was so good - their best in my opinion - and _BC_ degraded to a kind of cheezy romance in a SF setting. I guess maybe it was better than that, but only just. The only thing about that book that engaged (...) (28 years ago, 2-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

16 Messages in This Thread:





Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR