Thread replies: 4
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
Anonymous
I've finished reading City on Fire. Thoughts. 2016-01-29 15:09:52 Post No. 7636957
[Report] Image search: [Google]
I've finished reading City on Fire. Thoughts. 2016-01-29 15:09:52 Post No. 7636957
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: wintersnowpic.jpg (831KB, 1079x875px) Image search:
[Google]
831KB, 1079x875px
I've finished reading City on Fire. Thoughts.
Anonymous
2016-01-29 15:09:52
Post No. 7636957
[Report]
Wow.
As in, wow, what a disappointment.
Overall, it wasn't *too* bad, but it wasn't worth the publishers paying 2 million dollars for. The characters, plot, and prose were all reasonably good, but there were plenty of dull sections, to say nothing of not being nearly as intellectual as many long books are, and how people descibed it. The problem is kinda the length. 900 pages could've been done in 400 pages. I'm not kidding. A huge book is also meant to have a bunch of main characters, and this has maybe 5. What I'm saying is: it was length and not depth.
Overall, this book was a 4/10 or 5/10. Maybe worth reading, and a great timesink, but not really good, and certainly not 2 million dollars good.
Anyone else read it?
>>
File: filmsgirlandguypic.png (137KB, 778x1009px) Image search:
[Google]
137KB, 778x1009px
Anyone?
>>
File: aliceinwonderlandlibrarypic.jpg (348KB, 680x1024px) Image search:
[Google]
348KB, 680x1024px
The moral of the story here is to read 2666 or Gravity's Rainbow instead.
>>
>>7637015
Maybe those shelves wouldn't sag so much if there weren't brass fucking figurines weighing them down.
Thread posts: 4
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3