1 of 7 people found the following review helpful
A horrible book ...,
This review is from: Alexander's Choice by Marlowe, Edmund (2012) (Paperback)
... for all the reasons shown in Loup's review " - Apologia for Pedophillia".
The book posits that it is quite all right for a 23-year-old man to have full sex with a 13-year-old boy, and that society is somehow screwed up for believing otherwise. If you believe this, no amount of one-star reviews (and no amount of therapy, I guess) will make you believe otherwise. Go buy the book, or check my dustbin and you can have it for free. This book has the distinction of being the first I have thrown away.
As for the writing style, check some of the five-star reviews. I am pretty certain I recognise the style in at least one of them.
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-4 of 4 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 4 Aug 2014 11:24:04 BDT
New York Resident says:
I wonder if I'm the only one who gets annoyed with reviews like this by guys who're clearly only pretending to have read the book they're talking about. There are quite a lot and I'm just picking on this one because it's so blatant here: he says nothing not in the review by "Loup" to which he refers, he unrealizingly copies Loup's one little error (the boy was 14, not 13) and even copies his saying he'd thrown the book away (though it's obvious he wouldn't in the first place buy a book on something his mind is firmly closed to). Pretty clearly he just read Loup's review, got into a bait about the subject matter and decided to sound off. If you look up his other reviews, all twenty are short and superficial, and all are non-verified purchases. Probably he hasn't read a single one and just uses the pretence of reviewing as a way of tricking people into reading his uninformed opinions.
It's especially annoying when you read a controversial book like Alexander's Choice and then come here looking forward to hearing how other readers reacted differently from you and why. Both Loup who dislikes the book and the guys who loved it went to a lot of trouble to explain why for the rest of us, and deserve our thanks. People like this David cheapen their efforts by mixing them up with their strong opinions on things they really know nothing about. It's also extremely dishonest.
Amazon, please do something about this. I guess allowing only verified purchasers to review would exclude some guys who bought books elsewhere but are willing to write great reviews. What about increasing the minimum length of reviews for non-verified purchasers?
In reply to an earlier post on 4 Aug 2014 11:40:03 BDT
Be pissed off if you do not agree with me and you are one of those people who can't stand it if other people's opinions differ from your own. Do not be pissed of on account of me "clearly pretending" to have read the book, because I did read it. I bought it from Amazon after reading the blurb and the high star scores, but I wish I had read the reviews in depth beforehand, especially Loup's. Loup said everything I would like to have said, but better. I would have thought I made this clear. There was little point in me repeating it. As for the alleged superficiality of my other reviews, you call them superficial, I call them concise. I do not want to read pages of literary review when I buy a book, reviews that often contain spoilers. I want a few lines that give me a feel for what I am considering, and in the belief that others may feel the same, that's how I write my reviews. As for my error over the boy's age, he was 13 at the beginning of the affair, and 14 when it was fully consummated, if that term can be applied. Do you find that more acceptable? Probably not, as you do not challenge anything in my review, your comments being based solely on your erroneous belief that I did not read the book. You berate me for expressing strong opinions about I subject I know nothing about and question my honesty, and yet you know nothing about me at all. As it happens, I worked in London combating child sexual abuse for several years. I have seen the harm that can be done, and I have heard all the excuses and justifications, several of which I recognised in the book.
In reply to an earlier post on 6 Aug 2014 11:30:02 BDT
New York Resident says:
Thanks for your reply. We all deserve the benefit of the doubt, so I'll assume you have read the books you've reviewed. I'm sorry I argued otherwise. I agree a review needn't be pages long, but we'll have to agree to disagree though about the value of reviews so short you cannot explain for yourself why a book is good or bad.
I didn't challenge anything in your review because it wasn't my point and anyway, as you say yourself, you said nothing Loup hadn't already said. Your answer has now told us one thing about you (though not about the book): you "worked in London combating child abuse." Meaning we should all defer to you as you know better than the rest of us and just take your word for it the passionate love Marlowe describes is "abuse", huh?
Actually, this undermines your credibility as a critic, because, unlike Loup and the rest of us, you were never free to appraise the story with an open mind; you have a strong vested interest. Just supposing society were one day to change its mind (such things have happened) and decide Marlowe was right and you were wrong, where would that leave you as someone who has inflicted misery and ruin on guys who society would then be agreeing had done no harm? Per Marlowe's last chapter, on exactly the same moral plain as Jew-hunting Gestapo officers. Think about it.
Incidentally, it may be a small point, but I'm afraid your harping on about 13 doesn't look honest. I've checked it out again. The boy Alexander's 14th birthday is described; it's clear neither he nor the young schoolmaster had then had any sexual thoughts about each other.
In reply to an earlier post on 7 Aug 2014 10:04:12 BDT
[Deleted by Amazon on 7 Aug 2014 10:11:25 BDT]
‹ Previous 1 Next ›