Argh! This book review is still not coherent. I keep re-writing sections of it, but it doesn't come together. Honestly (and I don't like blaming the author) but I feel like the problem is that Lewis doesn't really have unity of purpose in his book, and so I feel like I'm jumping all over the place, trying to review it. Like, he's warning against the dangers of rejecting history in one place, and he's attempting to inspire the contemporary audience (of 1955) away from their hopelessness in another place; he's only concerned with the deliberately written word of authors, allegedly, but then he's trying to psychoanalyse the authors (he puts a lot of emphasis on the role of the authors' personality, and keeps confusing the authors with their characters). He claims that he's dealing with the groups in three groups, but then often makes it unclear which groups people belong to, and really undercuts his claim by dealing with each author individually and showing that they were all really different from each other. I find that his intention is interesting, and that the Adamic myth is a useful way of viewing American literature, but it all gets muddled up in the actual writing of it.
But I kept convincing myself that I was the problem here. That I just couldn't get into the book, or fully understand it. Okay. I need to find a way to write this stuff out in a balanced way, because Dr. B made me paranoid of negative reviews.
2 comments:
Ok, I'm sorry, but what you just wrote here looks like the review to me. If the author is unclear in fulfilling what he's said he's going to, it's his fault, not yours. Don't let Dr. B scare you off from writing negative reviews, but do remember to balanced. And I'm sure you will find a balanced way of presenting your argument about the merits and faults of the book.
Use this as a review.... OK, I know, you can't do that.... Still, it gets your idea across without boring or confusing the reader. Good job.
Post a Comment