(no subject)

[nolly]

62) All Clear

Now that I've read both halves, I can comment on the work as a whole. I have to say that I did not like it as much as I was expecting to, based on past experience reading Willis and on reviews from other readers. It just seemed too long, too slow to me. This is 100% a matter of personal taste, and I might like / have liked it better reading at another time, even. I don't want to get too specific for those who haven't read them, but I wasn't crazy about the time travel theory element, either.

Which is not to say it's a bad book, but, of her novels, I prefer Passage, and I think she really shines brightest as a short story writer.

Comments

[dinogrl.livejournal.com]

I've always found Connie to be plodding (from just my standpoint, mind you) and almost caught up in verbosity for verbosity's sake...does that make sense? I'm sure I am in the minority. Many, many people would say the contrary.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

You might prefer her short stories; I find the writing is generally tighter. In general, I think I have to be in the right mood for her longer works, and I wasn't quite there for this, because I was trying to read it before the Hugo deadline. (didn't quite make it, but had read enough to rank them with some confidence.)

[usqueba.livejournal.com]

I think they were too wordy in places but I loved both books.

I think she got parts of the time travel theory wrong (even if it's HER theory) but that's just me.

[(Anonymous)]

I really like some of her longer works, but I concur with you on these two. I think part of the problem for me was the way she broke it up into sections with different narrators made it feel choppy and more like a collection of short stories rather than a novel(s). -Marjolijn