Take a photo of a barcode or cover
blairconrad's Reviews (1.12k)
Disclosure: Chris Anderson sent me an Author Review Copy of this book on the condition that I read it and write some kind of bloggy review about it. I would’ve read the book and written this entry anyhow. Mr. Anderson did not make any attempt to influence the kind of review that I would write.
First, I enjoyed the tone of the book. Anderson has a very pleasant writing style, that made me feel at ease, just as when I’m reading one of Stephen Berlin Johnson or Malcolm Gladwell’s books. This is orthogonal to the content, but is still an important consideration for me.
The content. It’s good. Anderson does a very good job of explaining the Long Tail phenomenon – what it is, where it shows up, and why we should care. This is a short book, and so some of the topics aren’t plumbed to their ultimate depths, but for an introductory tome, and one not necessarily intended to be a “How You Can Make Money from the Long Tail” lesson (although there’s some of that), that wouldn’t have been an appropriate tack. In fact, there was more depth of coverage than I’d expected. First, the analysis of how movies, television, and other industries have operated in the past almost guaranteed that there wouldn’t be a Long Tail was interesting – not only have we as consumers been selecting for hits, but so have the industries. I also enjoyed the historical examples of long(ish) tails, notably how catalogue shopping a la Sears was an example of an early long tail industry, just as were supermarkets. Finally, there’s an interesting analysis of why Long Tails arise, and what’s needed for them to work – using real world examples to show why just having a huge pile of undifferentiated junk isn’t good enough.
Anderson’s clearly put a lot of thought into the history, current state, and future of long tail industries, and he’s packaged it in an entertaining and engaging book. Highly recommended for anyone interested in why and how hot new companies like Amazon, Google, and Netflix work.
First, I enjoyed the tone of the book. Anderson has a very pleasant writing style, that made me feel at ease, just as when I’m reading one of Stephen Berlin Johnson or Malcolm Gladwell’s books. This is orthogonal to the content, but is still an important consideration for me.
The content. It’s good. Anderson does a very good job of explaining the Long Tail phenomenon – what it is, where it shows up, and why we should care. This is a short book, and so some of the topics aren’t plumbed to their ultimate depths, but for an introductory tome, and one not necessarily intended to be a “How You Can Make Money from the Long Tail” lesson (although there’s some of that), that wouldn’t have been an appropriate tack. In fact, there was more depth of coverage than I’d expected. First, the analysis of how movies, television, and other industries have operated in the past almost guaranteed that there wouldn’t be a Long Tail was interesting – not only have we as consumers been selecting for hits, but so have the industries. I also enjoyed the historical examples of long(ish) tails, notably how catalogue shopping a la Sears was an example of an early long tail industry, just as were supermarkets. Finally, there’s an interesting analysis of why Long Tails arise, and what’s needed for them to work – using real world examples to show why just having a huge pile of undifferentiated junk isn’t good enough.
Anderson’s clearly put a lot of thought into the history, current state, and future of long tail industries, and he’s packaged it in an entertaining and engaging book. Highly recommended for anyone interested in why and how hot new companies like Amazon, Google, and Netflix work.
Very enjoyable. All of [a:GGK|60177|Guy Gavriel Kay|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1218804723p2/60177.jpg]'s trademark touches are there - historically-inspired fiction lightly tinged with the supernatural, short side stories from minor characters' points of view, and elegantly written prose. And once again, he pulls it off and sucked me in.
The court intrigue and the way in which the spirit world was involved most reminded me of [b:Sailing to Sarantium|690212|Sailing to Sarantium (The Sarantine Mosaic Ser., Bk. 1)|Guy Gavriel Kay|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1177267466s/690212.jpg|1336666] - a good thing.
I found most of the characters to be quite likable, and the story moved at a good pace, keeping me entertained throughout, with only a minor slowdown (and a touching, yet slightly more drawn-out encounter between two of the principals near the end).
Definitely one to read, and maybe even to buy.
The court intrigue and the way in which the spirit world was involved most reminded me of [b:Sailing to Sarantium|690212|Sailing to Sarantium (The Sarantine Mosaic Ser., Bk. 1)|Guy Gavriel Kay|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1177267466s/690212.jpg|1336666] - a good thing.
I found most of the characters to be quite likable, and the story moved at a good pace, keeping me entertained throughout, with only a minor slowdown (and a touching, yet slightly more drawn-out encounter between two of the principals near the end).
Definitely one to read, and maybe even to buy.
Unlike many, I'm neither thrilled nor devastated by the book. Disappointed, though. It's perhaps unfair to expect all an author's books to hit the same high level as an early breakout work, but it's hard not to, and Beatrice & Virgil is no [b:Life of Pi|4214|Life of Pi|Yann Martel|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266448756s/4214.jpg|1392700]. As has been pointed out, the book reads as an apology for the gap between Yann's novels, rather than as a complete work of its own. Worse, gone is the beautifully quirky prose of LoP, replaced with rather pedestrian descriptions of Henry's activities. The book actually descends into the level of "boring" in a few places - a crime for something that weighs in at under 200 pages.
The only time the book is special at all is during the play snippets, and those peak early (with the pear scene - brilliant, and probably earned the book 2.5 of its three stars above). By the end, rather than eagerly anticipating more play scenes, we're made uncomfortable by them and want to avoid them.
The only time the book is special at all is during the play snippets, and those peak early (with the pear scene - brilliant, and probably earned the book 2.5 of its three stars above). By the end, rather than eagerly anticipating more play scenes, we're made uncomfortable by them and want to avoid them.
The first unillustrated book I've reread since about 2005*, when I discovered the joys of my local library. Completely worth it.
Of course the emotional impact was slightly less this time around - the big surprises weren't so much anymore, and I wasn't quite as attached to the characters.
All this means is that I cried quietly to myself a couple times, instead of bawling my eyes out.
The book is very well done - the time-travel aspect is treated better than in any other work I can think of, including ostensibly serious science fiction, of which I've read a lot. The plot hangs together beautifully, and just pulled me along. Like last time, every time I put it down, I itched to go back to it and continue reading. Still at the top of my list to recommend to friends and strangers.
Paul Duncan recently pointed out to me that this is not true - before reading [b:Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows|2737272|Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Harry Potter, #7)|J.K. Rowling|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51paCtub%2BGL._SL75_.jpg|2963218], I reread the other Harry Potters. But that wasn't because I wanted to reread those books based on their own merits.
Of course the emotional impact was slightly less this time around - the big surprises weren't so much anymore, and I wasn't quite as attached to the characters.
All this means is that I cried quietly to myself a couple times, instead of bawling my eyes out.
The book is very well done - the time-travel aspect is treated better than in any other work I can think of, including ostensibly serious science fiction, of which I've read a lot. The plot hangs together beautifully, and just pulled me along. Like last time, every time I put it down, I itched to go back to it and continue reading. Still at the top of my list to recommend to friends and strangers.
Paul Duncan recently pointed out to me that this is not true - before reading [b:Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows|2737272|Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Harry Potter, #7)|J.K. Rowling|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51paCtub%2BGL._SL75_.jpg|2963218], I reread the other Harry Potters. But that wasn't because I wanted to reread those books based on their own merits.
Interesting thesis - that excessive choice can be bad. Schwartz explains ways in which we may be better of with more limited choices (at least more limited than members of rich, relatively free nations have).
I've experienced this myself, on a small scale - usually "menu paralysis" - I've often said to a waitperson that I'd be better off if there were only 3 kinds of entrée....
Perhaps the most interesting point in the book is the difference between maximizers, who expend tonnes of effort to ensure that they get the best of whatever they're looking for, and satisficers, who have standards, but will pick the first thing that meets those standards. It turns out that satisficers are generally much happier and less prone to depression and regret. The explanation was compelling enough to make me want to shift my needle toward satisficering.
The book's major downside is the level of repetition - the same few points are made over and over, with little variation, so it gets a little boring by the end.
I've experienced this myself, on a small scale - usually "menu paralysis" - I've often said to a waitperson that I'd be better off if there were only 3 kinds of entrée....
Perhaps the most interesting point in the book is the difference between maximizers, who expend tonnes of effort to ensure that they get the best of whatever they're looking for, and satisficers, who have standards, but will pick the first thing that meets those standards. It turns out that satisficers are generally much happier and less prone to depression and regret. The explanation was compelling enough to make me want to shift my needle toward satisficering.
The book's major downside is the level of repetition - the same few points are made over and over, with little variation, so it gets a little boring by the end.
Very good. The art generally looks nice, but I sometimes find it hard to distinguish characters without context (readers of my reviews will notice a theme here). Still, I was interested in the story - it was nice to return to the Buffyverse after so long.
The thing that really make this book, though, was the dialogue. Joss scripted, so the characters' voices rang true, with a few very funny lines that felt just like they were coming out of Geller or Brendon's mouths. Also, the in-jokes.
Not the same as watching the TV series, but pretty close.
The thing that really make this book, though, was the dialogue. Joss scripted, so the characters' voices rang true, with a few very funny lines that felt just like they were coming out of Geller or Brendon's mouths. Also, the in-jokes.
Not the same as watching the TV series, but pretty close.
Quirky and fun. I enjoyed the introduction to Martin and his fastidious, oddball thievery. There were enough wacky hi-jinx and crazy internal dialogue to draw me through the book quickly. The prose was slightly unpolished, and I think Dicks could benefit from slightly more experience there, so I'm keeping my eye out for more from him.
In essence, a fairly simplistic heist story (with a few bumps along the way and a small twist). The characters aren't particularly well-developed, but each has an interesting quirk that served to help me distinguish them. I appreciate that.
The text of the book is clearly dated, with the dialogue showing this like nothing else, but it has character. Westlake delivers a wacky story that elicited a chuckle from me more than once. Not stellar, but it shows promise, and I wouldn't pass up later books in the series if I ran across them.
The text of the book is clearly dated, with the dialogue showing this like nothing else, but it has character. Westlake delivers a wacky story that elicited a chuckle from me more than once. Not stellar, but it shows promise, and I wouldn't pass up later books in the series if I ran across them.
A very interesting premise, and pretty exciting pacing.
Other than that, there's really nothing here. The characters were completely undeveloped and the prose was - at best - flat and uninteresting, with absolutely no personality. The dialogue was a travesty - wooden at best, and often reminiscent of a very dry encyclopedia entry.
Couple that with a tonne of typos (including a company name going from Halix to Halifax a mere 217 pages apart), and way too many POVs, and I was left with a book that I finished for the sake of finishing, not out of any particular enjoyment.
Other than that, there's really nothing here. The characters were completely undeveloped and the prose was - at best - flat and uninteresting, with absolutely no personality. The dialogue was a travesty - wooden at best, and often reminiscent of a very dry encyclopedia entry.
Couple that with a tonne of typos (including a company name going from Halix to Halifax a mere 217 pages apart), and way too many POVs, and I was left with a book that I finished for the sake of finishing, not out of any particular enjoyment.
Everyone seems to be going nuts over this, but I'm giving it an "okay". Comparable to [b:Blueberry Girl|1967067|Blueberry Girl|Neil Gaiman|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1255794534s/1967067.jpg|1970229], maybe a little less engaging. And the art didn't do it for me, for the most part - a little flat and sparse, although there were a few cute moments, and on second read, I picked out some elements that I'd missed the first time, so maybe I'm being a little harsh.