Re: Re: 'Spiders' review from the LA Review of Books

I wonder however, what it says about the novel that you need a "stay
with it that it gets better" warning.  Was the initial part simply
allowed to run too long?

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 8:19 AM, toddbehr60 <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah, great review. It's a big comfort to know that I don't have another 300 pages of uninterrupted cum/piss/toejam/snot/dickcheese/shit (and precious little else) ahead of me.
>
> I still may have to stop every once in a while and read something lighter to "cleanse the palette" -- I've been using E.C. Tubb's "Dumarest," assorted "Star Trek" and assorted other books as diversions between chunks of "Spiders". But I think I'll be able to finish now.
>
> Daddy Todd
>
>
> --- In [email protected], Zvi Gilbert <zvi@...> wrote:
>>
>> I think this review is exceptionally insightful, written by someone who is
>> aware of Delany's output, and may give rise to some discussions about
>> exactly what kind of a book it is and what it's trying to do, referencing
>> our discussions over the last little while...
>>
>> <http://lareviewofbooks.org/article.php?type=&id=652&fulltext=1&media=>
>>
>> --Z
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> == Posted to delany-list, hosted at yahoo groups ==
> == A mailing list for the discussion of the works of Samuel R. Delany. ==Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>