Over at Horroscope they’ve cast a critical eye over Aurealis 40, and have commented that Never Grow Oldlinger(s) long after the final sentence.”

Cool 🙂

They also have very nice things to say about the work of my good friends Paul Haines and Stephen Dedman, and whilst I disagree with their summation of Adam Browne’s story (I think Browne is one of the most wonderfully unique and individual writers in Australian SF, and one of the most genuinely interesting short story writers I’ve read), the reviewer takes pains to point out that it’s a function of his own reading taste rather than the quality of the workmanship.

Read the full review here.

5 thoughts on “

  1. thanks, Lee – but yeah, I was absolutely fine with that review – it was thoughtful and honest – and I can understand someone finding the story-pretending-to-be-a scholarly-article a less than exciting genre. For example, it took me a long time to enjoy Stanislaw Lem’s faux reviews of books never written, but now I love most of them, esp the one about the book detailing the exploits of the nazis who create a strange crude Palace of Versailles in the jungles of South America… Adam B


  2. Yeah, Lem’s work can take a bit of time to get into, especially the faux-academia, but I tend to think that’s a matter of translation. I don’t mind when a reviewer is upfront about their reading preferences, either. It’s a much more honest approach than some I’ve seen in recent years. I just disagree with his view, in this instance. I think you’re a beautiful wordsmith, and absolutely unique in Australian circles, and I get excited when I see your name in a ToC.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s