Well, yeah, and your point is…? Should I go to Goodreads or such and check out some reviews instead? [sometimes I do] The back cover blurb is there to CONVINCE me to spring for the thing. If it fails to do that, and in fact backfires, then it has utterly failed to do its job, has it not?
Of course, the things are typically Generic Mass Product designed to appeal to the L.C.D., which isn’t me, so OF COURSE the blurbs will be chock full of fantasy cliches, since that is precisely what appeals to such readers.
Naw, no criticism intended. I just wanted to throw out the phrase, because I’d never actually gotten a chance to say it IRL to someone who literally does it.
I am sorry about that. I went to a book signing for Knife of Dreams and then later that year he was diagnosed with primary amyloidosis with cardiomyopathy.
De gustibus and all that, but you really have missed out on some first-rate literature. If Tolkienesque swords-and-sorcery isn’t your thing*, there’s plenty of non-traditional fantasy to explore. Last year I discovered N. K. Jemison’s The City We Became, which is superb; and China Miéville’s novels are bizzare but fascinating (I especially recommend “Embassytown” and “The City and the City”). Charles Stross’ Laundry Files novels are a fun mix of Lovecraftian cosmic horror and satire of government bureaucracy (in one of them, an eldritch assassination is accomplished via PowerPoint presentation).
*If you are willing to try more traditional fantasy, Lois McMaster Bujold’s World of the Five Gods novels and novellas are a fresh take on the genre. I’ve never before read a medievalesque fantasy where the heroine who saves the day, kills the baddie, and rescues the dude in distress is a middle-aged widowed grandmother.
Cardiac amyloidosis (CA) is really, really rare. It’s a subtype of the rarest category of cardiomyopathy – restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM).
I have something called Non-Tropical Eosinophilic Endomyocardial Fibrosis – almost unheard of in advanced nations. My restrictive cardiomyopathy looks with envy at cardiac amyloidosis, because CA – relatively speaking – is ubiquitous, gets all the money, gets all the press, and always gets the girl.
While I stay passively informed about CA research, it’s for naught. The various subtypes of RCM are so amazingly heterogenous that – just as Jordan explains vis-à-vis the subtypes of CA – what might save one kind of patient might easily kill another. They just bucket all of us RCM subtypes in order to have enough sample size to not sound like idiots.
But there’s no extrapolating from one subtype to another.
I just read a bit about Jordan as he embarked on his CA journey at the MN Mayo, and was inspired.
Until I looked up his date of death – some 18 months later.
Robert Jordan is still my favorite author, despite his having shuffled off this mortal coil.
Sanderson did some hard work finishing up the series, but you can really tell the parts where he was given a lot of free rein versus those where Jordan already had things nailed down. Those parts of the story REALLY suffer, in my opinion.
I just finished a full re-read a couple of months ago; the first time I’ve re-read the Sanderson entries since A Memory of Light released… if anything, after giving it time, I found I liked them less, when I expected I’d be less jaded than the first time around.
Guapo just flounced off the board with an on-demand request for immediate bannination after he got a warning for threadshitting about trans issues in the Polarization thread in GD.
@What_Exit - I know you get dumped on sometimes, so I understand you wanting the pre-emptive defense. But I think you’re good - they were posting apparently not understanding the basic (and revised within their [short] tenure here) rules on topics the board chooses to no longer debate.
Though they blamed moderation, perhaps seeing it as a personal attack, rather than an even-handed application of the rules as written.
Though again, I doubt W_E would have had any pushback from the denizens of this thread.
So, take a good job , have a or , and know that some and likely all of us are thinking it was a job needing doing, which you did with a minimum of fuss. Bravo!
His “cite” supporting his claim that we were at risk of criminalizing the misgendering of people was a Newsweek poll of 1,500 people aged 27-42, of whom 44% agreed with the statement “referring to someone by the wrong gender pronoun (he/him, she/her) should be a criminal offense,”
It also suggests he wasn’t listening to people who were trying to say that not all “extremes” are bad. It’s not hypocritical to have some things where you think the extremes are okay. Heck, that’s what the statement he quoted said.
He seemed more interesting in calling people out than listening.
, have a 
or 
, and know that some and likely all of us are thinking it was a job needing doing, which you did with a minimum of fuss. Bravo!