[ZASHAGALKA]

Originally Posted by Tweety

Since the op read her other books and was looking for specifics about this particular book, I took it she wasn't asking for opinions about the writer but the book or the value of theory in general.

When I consider a book, the author is normally very relevant to me. I will buy books from authors I like just because they wrote it. And while I don't find all such books to have been worth it on their individual merit, I consider it iimportant to understand that author's full body of work for the next great book they write.

To that extent, the OP wouldn't need any other opinion but her own.

If she was seeking further input, I took that to mean that she was asking if anybody else either shared or didn't share her opinion.

There are other threads ongoing right now about theory and I've been more detailed there, as always. I WAS trying to be concise here because I didn't want to start a debate, but just give my opinion to the question at hand.

(But tweety, we're cool. I respect your opinion on most things, whether I agree w/ them or not.)

~faith,
Timothy.

[Tweety]

Originally Posted by ZASHAGALKA

(But tweety, we're cool. I respect your opinion on most things, whether I agree w/ them or not.)

~faith,
Timothy.

I still think she/he was asking about one book and whether or not people have read it and not soliciting opinions about the author. But I understand how a negative opinion by someone who hasn't read the book would be appropriate.......in a roundabout way. We're cool as always Tim, and we disagree 90% of the time, but I'm right and you're wrong as always. j/k

[bookwormom]

Actually, I was asking about the book, but as this discussion seems pretty relaxed, I'd like to say a bit more. First, let me say that I am a book fanatic, and books mean a great deal to me. (I too seek out books by authors I like.) But I rarely buy books new unless I have a special need. Hence my desire for feedback before purchase!

Since my research makes reference to Watson and phenomenology, I thought this might be a good book to have in hand. (There's a big section on a phenomenologist called Levinas.) I don't have the book in front of me; it's at work, but here are my observations:

Watson has something important to say, but the book seems seriously in need of editing. The presentation of thoughts and the syntax almost read like the text was translated from another language. Now, I feel like I am not in a position to criticize a published author, but I wonder if anyone else has noticed this?

I'm interested in sharing thoughts with someone who has read a lot of Watson's work and can discuss it, particularly this most recent book. Watson's work has been very useful to me, even though I don't accept all of it. Still, it seems like I haven't read much that could be considered objective criticism.