Word: readerly
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 2000-2009
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...kids-on-the-run sci-fi thriller. But Ishiguro's characters don't do rebellion. This writer is fascinated by people simply making the best of their fates. So there are no chases through woods, no baying bloodhounds. Instead, the book takes on a cool, anthropological tone, inviting the reader to study these unusual creatures as if they were specimens in a jar - which makes it all the more of a jolt when you actually start to care about them. As with all Ishiguro's books, the main characters - a group of friends, led by Kathy H. and Tommy...
...complex, but Gaines works hard to keep his prose accessible and entertaining--sometimes too hard, as when he writes of Prussia's ruling family, "The Hohenzollerns were a funny bunch," or when, in the midst of explaining Pythagorean numbers and the theory of affections in music, he assures the reader defensively, "This will be over soon." Even the most abstract passages, though, are warmed by his obvious reverence for Bach, whose music he has been playing on the piano since he was a child...
...Bloggies are the Web's answer to the Oscars, but this is one award show you can attend in boxers, not Bulgari. The fifth annual Weblog Awards, to be posted March 14 on BLOGGIES.COM, will name winners (chosen by reader votes) in 30 categories, ranging from Most Humorous to Best Designed. Among new categories this year: Best Food Blog and Best Entertainment Blog. And who will be the Web's Million Dollar Baby? Favorites to nab the coveted Weblog of the Year award include BOINGBOING.NET and WONKETTE.COM. The winners won't get a gold statuette or even a trip...
...fact, his characters often don’t seem human at all: their dialogue is somewhat unrealistic and at times robotic. But the plot is intriguing—and Cruikshank keeps his reader guessing right up until the very...
...Ulrich are guilty of…suppressing inconvenient evidence, spinning the data their way, [and] refusing to follow leads that didn’t serve their thesis.” But Wiener never explains what evidence was suppressed or what leads weren’t followed. He gives his reader no reason to believe that Gray, Katz, and Ulrich spun their data...