overland - review bias?
not to diss on the excellent overland or its blog discussion http://web.overland.org.au/?p=1058 - but came across the link on derek motion's blog typing space (sorry derek, tried to get the link to work but it won't for some reason keeps going to wordpress main page - so trust people know your blog well enough to have it in favourites or they can just google you and find it) - and so responded with a comment on derek's blog and a mention that i had done so on the overland blog comments.
please link to derek's blog comment on this one for what i think, as i am too lazy now to retype it all, but happy if any want to challenge me here directly.
i can't think of anything or anyone who warrants a blatant 'running interference' as i said on derek's comment stream - this sort of thing silences true and healthy discussion of poetics in ozland (or i said it in a longer and more detailed fashion).
just doesn't seem right to me and i feel it needs to be addressed more completely by the editors of Overland, than what appears to be the rationale offered in the Overland blog comments stream.
mistakes are ok, but to defend them as being ok, seems not too cool and a little lacking the rigor required for independent discussion. i myself, prefer not to write a review if there is nothing positive to say, let the work go unreviewed - but for those brave enough to challenge with a not so nice review, go for it - but watch your back.
please link to derek's blog comment on this one for what i think, as i am too lazy now to retype it all, but happy if any want to challenge me here directly.
i can't think of anything or anyone who warrants a blatant 'running interference' as i said on derek's comment stream - this sort of thing silences true and healthy discussion of poetics in ozland (or i said it in a longer and more detailed fashion).
just doesn't seem right to me and i feel it needs to be addressed more completely by the editors of Overland, than what appears to be the rationale offered in the Overland blog comments stream.
mistakes are ok, but to defend them as being ok, seems not too cool and a little lacking the rigor required for independent discussion. i myself, prefer not to write a review if there is nothing positive to say, let the work go unreviewed - but for those brave enough to challenge with a not so nice review, go for it - but watch your back.