9 of 9 people found the following review helpful
Good, but not deep,
This review is from: The Duck That Won the Lottery: and 99 Other Bad Arguments (Hardcover)
If you are looking for an in-depth look at rhetorical methods then look elsewhere. This is light, fluffy reading and those with more than average awareness will find little to chew on. That said it does make for a quick read and makes plenty of valid points, albeit often pretty obvious ones. If you read the media without looking behind the language then you should be read this or something similar. The only problem of course is that the book is really designed for those who would not read a book on the subject. Catch 22. The tone is a trifle inconsistent, veering between chatty to more measured and, sorry to say, includes some hideous modern office-style slang, which will date terribly. He is also obviously trying hard to be fair to everybody, admirable but not always entertaining. The best joke: sweeping statements are always wrong. Nice. It reads as if the author is holding back and only really comes alive when he starts bringing out the big guns and pointing out the philosophic arguments that underpin the destruction of the fallacies and takes a proper swing at something. The book itself suffers from amateur-looking typesetting (including huge leading), poor fonts and could certainly have done with a better editor to weed out the occasionally bizarre word choices. Good, but not what it could have been. Next time please let go a little.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-1 of 1 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 6 Oct 2009 00:54:36 BDT
Hopefully the new edition will sort out the type issues, but I wish they hadn't changed the title. I find "The duck that won the lottery" far more appealing. It suits my humour and imagination, and the title would look nice beside "The pig that wants to be eaten".
‹ Previous 1 Next ›