David Weber, LIKE A MIGHTY ARMY

Reviewed over at Tor.com:

David Weber’s Safehold series, now into its seventh volume, has thus far followed a very consistent pattern: people invent or rediscover new technologies, and use them to kill their enemies in new and inventive ways.

8 thoughts on “David Weber, LIKE A MIGHTY ARMY

  1. It was incredibly rude that you posted spoilers without any sort of warning at the top of the page. Have you no respect for those of us who support our favorite authors with our hard earned dollars, as opposed to downloading a bootlegged pdf file or waiting for the local library to find us a copy? Clearly not. Terribly unprofessional.

  2. As a librarian, I must admit I’m incredibly curious as to how you arrive at the conclusion that checking books out from libraries – and therefore supporting libraries – is not also supporting authors.

  3. I’m still baffled by the way “I dislike spoilers” and “I don’t use libraries or download illegal ebooks” are being presented together as if they’re connected in some way. Only people who buy hardbacks dislike spoilers? People who use libraries are also downloading PDFs, which are somehow more spoiled than ebooks than are bought from various purveyors thereof?

    The chain of argument, it escapes me.

  4. Here’s a thought: if you don’t want to know anything about the book being discussed, don’t read the bloody review. Easy! Simple! Especially since Tor.com doesn’t have an official policy when it comes to revelations of things in books, and leaves things up to the discretion of readers and writers. Caveat lector.

    And, personally, I don’t see what reading reviews has to do with paying – or not – for books. Unless you’re suggesting that people read reviews and then hasten to go out to commit copyright infringement? I assure you, publishers would immediately stop providing review copies if that was the case.

  5. Jennygadget, I would contend that there is a difference between not robbing our favorite authors by patronizing a library and actively supporting them by buying a personal copy of their work.

    Fade Manley, Disliking spoilers is what it is, and tossing them out with little to no warning is akin to telling someone how a movie ends. It’s just rude. As for a PDF, clearly you missed when I said a “bootlegged” PDF. It makes all the difference. If my logic escapes you, I’d suggest thoroughly reading what’s been written. If that seems like too much trouble, well, I’m sorry.

    Hawkeinglb, I read the review because I wanted to get an idea of what someone who read the ARC had to say. A synopsis of the story line isn’t untoward, or unexpected. Tossing off oh btw, the person on the cover that has been the subject of much skulduggery and debate? Solved. Wondering about the outcome of a major plot line twist? Here ya go. May as well hand over the notes and his plans for the rest of the series while you’re at it and save me the chore of spending hours reading my favorite author.

    I could forgive that though. Truth be told, if I’d known going in that I was going to read a major spoiler that way, I’d have probably read it anyway. But I wouldn’t have been able to be cranky if you’d warned me well in advance, say, near the top of the page, perhaps the first paragraph or so. That’s all I ask. I feel like that’s not too much.

  6. “I would contend that there is a difference between not robbing our favorite authors by patronizing a library and actively supporting them by buying a personal copy of their work.”

    The process by which libraries acquire books escapes you, I see. As does the amount of influence that libraries can have on book sales.

  7. I’m actually a fan of libraries. My friendly local library is where I discovered Heinlein, Jordan, Weber, Laumer, White, Brooks, Rowling, and so very many more. I’ll never forget that dear lady who took me by the hand and first led me through those hallowed halls. But I still I wouldn’t describe my reading as “supporting” an author unless and until I spend money to support that habit. I don’t feel the act of checking a book out from the library rises to that level.

  8. First sentence: “It was incredibly rude that you posted spoilers without any sort of warning at the top of the page.”

    So, it’s a reference specifically to people who don’t like spoilers.

    “Have you no respect for those of us who support our favorite authors with our hard earned dollars, as opposed to downloading a bootlegged pdf file or waiting for the local library to find us a copy?”

    So, it’s a reference to people who buy books directly.

    What the ever-flying fuck do these two points have to do with each other? Is the implication supposed to be that people who check out books from the library shouldn’t be spared spoilers, but those who buy the books themselves should be spared? That people who pirate books should be hunted down and given spoilers? That spoilers are inherent to the reading of books that one has not purchased personally?

    Honestly, dude. I read what you said. You put these two sentences next to each other, as if one followed from the other. But they don’t. If you see some connection between “I believe you should not have included spoilers in your review” and “Do you respect people who buy books personally?”, it was deeply unclear. The two sentences have nothing whatsoever to do with each other, except that the spoilers in the first sentence happen to relate to books, and the dramatic rhetorical question referenced books explicitly.

Comments are closed.