a critic's late night

i've a stack of about six books on my desk for reviews, none of them particularly grab me. nothing about the covers, titles, or topics are that interesting and i wonder, why did i request these? the titles (we see only the main title and author) are unrecognizable to me as they sit here awaiting my evaluation.

when i work through a book, i don't just read it and that is it. i think through and process the material. some books take me a great while to think through. one particularly hairy one is about worry. it starts out with the assertion, worry is sin. no lead in, no maybe. just says, worry is sin. then ambles around the table to tell me why (and i wonder, why didn't the ambling come first, then i'd be more inclined to continue).

next, the author hits me with this corollary, the more you love God, the more you trust God. which isn't necessarily true. i know because i think we misjudge these things from our limited perspective. so i am having trouble with that one, it is bogging down right beside the worry is sin bit.

i'm unconvinced by the assertions because while they are stronger than some of the wish washy asserting i see, they are just sixteen pages into the book. this book, i think, suffers from one too many good undeveloped ideas. the initial example of worry this author uses has to do with being late to a college class and the angst one feels (ugh). the next example is one of feeling angst over abusing a child. in my opinion, this author's examples are as out of order as her assertions.

fortunately this book is only 133 pages. i will knock that out tonight and be done with it (i will force myself, which is a shame, if one has to force oneself to read something, it makes me wonder why i do this).

there is one exceptional, witty, well-researched (20 years well-researched!) book but it weighs in at a daunting 300+ pages, small type, many entertaining footnotes, but not a quick read by any standard.

another book, is 233 pages, and by a mega-church (or mega-church principaled pastor) on mediocrity. i can tell the book is about 133 pages too long. in the first ten or so pages, he's rounded the corner well enough but circled back three and four times to make the same point. again, bad editing to blame for that. but the author will take the hit.

it's late, i've a book to press through and a review to write, so i must tend to it.

incase you haven't seen my reviews before, i alphabetized and rated them.

*don't bother (total crap), **so-so (i only read it because i had to), ***good (i wouldn't buy it, but might recommend it), ****must read (would definately recommend), *****absolutely loved (would break down and purchase).