Crap Looking Books isn't just about intentionally judging books by their covers, and questioning if those judgements were right! It's about over-turning expectations and challenging preconceptions of books and literature. It's about asking "What on earth?" and then asking "Why?". To learn more give this a read, or head on over to our Facebook page.

Thursday 21 March 2013

I don't always ruin books with memes, but when I do..


I'm really not a fan of image memes. They reduce conversation to catchphrases and stifle creativity in a way that doesn't let good ideas develop into better ones. They're lazy, trite, easily dismissed and instantly forgotten. They're the Christmas cracker jokes of digital communication. 

But what I'm finding worse is this growing trend of taking a quote from a TV show, film or book and pasting it over the top of a (usually) relevant still. They're insulting to both the medium and the context of the remark. Often the text will be a bastardisation of the original script, and the image used will be from a completely different point in the film, or be a production still.

I'm really not a fan of image memes. They reduce conversation to catchphrases and stifle creativity in a way that doesn't let good ideas develop into better ones. They're lazy, trite, easily dismissed and instantly forgotten. They're the Christmas cracker jokes of digital communication. But what I'm finding worse is this growing trend of taking a quote from a TV show, film or book and pasting it over the top of a (usually) relevant still. They're insulting to both the medium and the context of the remark. Often the text will be a bastardisation of the original script, and the image used will be from a completely different point in the film, or be a production still. They serve absolutely no purpose other than to make those already familiar with the film or show nod with a sort of lazy nostalgia, acknowledging that yes this film was a thing and it was good, but then not taking any discussion further than the "like" button. They completely alienate anyone who isn't familiar with the original text, providing no explanation of context and generating responses of either confusion or a sort of lazy indifferent curiosity. If anyone is actually encouraged to seek out the original text, their viewing or enjoyment is askew from the start, because the significance of the scene depicted in the meme overrides what would be a normal viewing experience. They're waiting for the relevant scene, or expecting the entire text to hang off of it. When we recommend a film to someone, we don't (unless we're 10 years old) say "Oh it was awesome, there was this one scene when..." but rather tell them what the film is about, or who is in it and what style or genre it is.Much, much worse than all this though, is when people start to post passages from books over supposedly relevant images. Books, decent grown-up books, as a rule, do not have pictures. Pictures and scenes are formed by the reader during the process of reading. If an image or scene is provided for them, something is taken away from the reading process. This is why chosing cover art is so important, and why it can sometimes go so very wrong. To illustrate my point I've pulled the following quote from the opening of Charlotte Brontë's "Jane Eyre" and pasted it over a seemingly relevant image. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Nothing untoward there, readers of the book will acknowledge the relevance, while those unfamiliar with it will get the right idea. But here's the text again with three different images. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Clearly, three very different interpretations of the same basic text. Admittedly these are very facetious and intentionally misleading examples, and come from a part of the text where the actual situation is explained almost instantly after, but they serve very well to highlight how selection of images can change interpretation of an unfamiliar text. From the same book, here's another example. To further illustrate the point, I'm going to do the same to a line from a book I haven't read but intend to, "Prophecy" by Peter James. I don't know if the character is supposed to be drunk, or even if they're consuming alcohol. I don't know if they're at a table or where they are, but that image is now solidified, and could easily colour my reading when I finally take "Prophecy" to task and dismantle it for Crap Looking Books. So if you want to recommend a book to someone online then do it exactly how you would in person- tell them what genre it is, tell them what it's about and what the themes are. Don't construct them images, throw out lines of dialogue or describe specific scenes or plot threads. It's no better than reciting the "Is this a dagger I see before me?" speech and instantly expecting those listening to understand or care about Macbeth. It is insulting to the format, insulting to the craft of writing, and insulting to the creative processes that went into making the story. Share more books. Nick Sheridan xx
They serve absolutely no purpose other than to make those already familiar with the film or show nod with a sort of lazy nostalgia, acknowledging that yes this film was a thing and it was good, but then not taking any discussion further than the "like" button.

They completely alienate anyone who isn't familiar with the original text, providing no explanation of context and generating responses of either confusion or a sort of lazy indifferent curiosity. If anyone is actually encouraged to seek out the original text, their viewing or enjoyment is askew from the start, because the significance of the scene depicted in the meme overrides what would be a normal viewing experience. They're waiting for the relevant scene, or expecting the entire text to hang off of it. 

When we recommend a film to someone, we don't (unless we're 10 years old) say "Oh it was awesome, there was this one scene when..." but rather tell them what the film is about, or who is in it and what style or genre it is.
Much, much worse than all this though, is when people start to post passages from books over supposedly relevant images. Books, decent grown-up books, as a rule, do not have pictures. Pictures and scenes are formed by the reader during the process of reading. If an image or scene is provided for them, something is taken away from the reading process. This is why chosing cover art is so important, and why it can sometimes go so very wrong. 
To illustrate my point I've pulled the following quote from the opening of Charlotte Brontë's Jane Eyre and pasted it over a seemingly relevant image.

I'm really not a fan of image memes. They reduce conversation to catchphrases and stifle creativity in a way that doesn't let good ideas develop into better ones. They're lazy, trite, easily dismissed and instantly forgotten. They're the Christmas cracker jokes of digital communication. But what I'm finding worse is this growing trend of taking a quote from a TV show, film or book and pasting it over the top of a (usually) relevant still. They're insulting to both the medium and the context of the remark. Often the text will be a bastardisation of the original script, and the image used will be from a completely different point in the film, or be a production still. They serve absolutely no purpose other than to make those already familiar with the film or show nod with a sort of lazy nostalgia, acknowledging that yes this film was a thing and it was good, but then not taking any discussion further than the "like" button. They completely alienate anyone who isn't familiar with the original text, providing no explanation of context and generating responses of either confusion or a sort of lazy indifferent curiosity. If anyone is actually encouraged to seek out the original text, their viewing or enjoyment is askew from the start, because the significance of the scene depicted in the meme overrides what would be a normal viewing experience. They're waiting for the relevant scene, or expecting the entire text to hang off of it. When we recommend a film to someone, we don't (unless we're 10 years old) say "Oh it was awesome, there was this one scene when..." but rather tell them what the film is about, or who is in it and what style or genre it is.Much, much worse than all this though, is when people start to post passages from books over supposedly relevant images. Books, decent grown-up books, as a rule, do not have pictures. Pictures and scenes are formed by the reader during the process of reading. If an image or scene is provided for them, something is taken away from the reading process. This is why chosing cover art is so important, and why it can sometimes go so very wrong. To illustrate my point I've pulled the following quote from the opening of Charlotte Brontë's "Jane Eyre" and pasted it over a seemingly relevant image. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Nothing untoward there, readers of the book will acknowledge the relevance, while those unfamiliar with it will get the right idea. But here's the text again with three different images. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Clearly, three very different interpretations of the same basic text. Admittedly these are very facetious and intentionally misleading examples, and come from a part of the text where the actual situation is explained almost instantly after, but they serve very well to highlight how selection of images can change interpretation of an unfamiliar text. From the same book, here's another example. To further illustrate the point, I'm going to do the same to a line from a book I haven't read but intend to, "Prophecy" by Peter James. I don't know if the character is supposed to be drunk, or even if they're consuming alcohol. I don't know if they're at a table or where they are, but that image is now solidified, and could easily colour my reading when I finally take "Prophecy" to task and dismantle it for Crap Looking Books. So if you want to recommend a book to someone online then do it exactly how you would in person- tell them what genre it is, tell them what it's about and what the themes are. Don't construct them images, throw out lines of dialogue or describe specific scenes or plot threads. It's no better than reciting the "Is this a dagger I see before me?" speech and instantly expecting those listening to understand or care about Macbeth. It is insulting to the format, insulting to the craft of writing, and insulting to the creative processes that went into making the story. Share more books. Nick Sheridan xx
Nothing untoward there, readers of the book will acknowledge the relevance, while those unfamiliar with it will get the right idea. But here's the text again with three different images.

I'm really not a fan of image memes. They reduce conversation to catchphrases and stifle creativity in a way that doesn't let good ideas develop into better ones. They're lazy, trite, easily dismissed and instantly forgotten. They're the Christmas cracker jokes of digital communication. But what I'm finding worse is this growing trend of taking a quote from a TV show, film or book and pasting it over the top of a (usually) relevant still. They're insulting to both the medium and the context of the remark. Often the text will be a bastardisation of the original script, and the image used will be from a completely different point in the film, or be a production still. They serve absolutely no purpose other than to make those already familiar with the film or show nod with a sort of lazy nostalgia, acknowledging that yes this film was a thing and it was good, but then not taking any discussion further than the "like" button. They completely alienate anyone who isn't familiar with the original text, providing no explanation of context and generating responses of either confusion or a sort of lazy indifferent curiosity. If anyone is actually encouraged to seek out the original text, their viewing or enjoyment is askew from the start, because the significance of the scene depicted in the meme overrides what would be a normal viewing experience. They're waiting for the relevant scene, or expecting the entire text to hang off of it. When we recommend a film to someone, we don't (unless we're 10 years old) say "Oh it was awesome, there was this one scene when..." but rather tell them what the film is about, or who is in it and what style or genre it is.Much, much worse than all this though, is when people start to post passages from books over supposedly relevant images. Books, decent grown-up books, as a rule, do not have pictures. Pictures and scenes are formed by the reader during the process of reading. If an image or scene is provided for them, something is taken away from the reading process. This is why chosing cover art is so important, and why it can sometimes go so very wrong. To illustrate my point I've pulled the following quote from the opening of Charlotte Brontë's "Jane Eyre" and pasted it over a seemingly relevant image. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Nothing untoward there, readers of the book will acknowledge the relevance, while those unfamiliar with it will get the right idea. But here's the text again with three different images. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Clearly, three very different interpretations of the same basic text. Admittedly these are very facetious and intentionally misleading examples, and come from a part of the text where the actual situation is explained almost instantly after, but they serve very well to highlight how selection of images can change interpretation of an unfamiliar text. From the same book, here's another example. To further illustrate the point, I'm going to do the same to a line from a book I haven't read but intend to, "Prophecy" by Peter James. I don't know if the character is supposed to be drunk, or even if they're consuming alcohol. I don't know if they're at a table or where they are, but that image is now solidified, and could easily colour my reading when I finally take "Prophecy" to task and dismantle it for Crap Looking Books. So if you want to recommend a book to someone online then do it exactly how you would in person- tell them what genre it is, tell them what it's about and what the themes are. Don't construct them images, throw out lines of dialogue or describe specific scenes or plot threads. It's no better than reciting the "Is this a dagger I see before me?" speech and instantly expecting those listening to understand or care about Macbeth. It is insulting to the format, insulting to the craft of writing, and insulting to the creative processes that went into making the story. Share more books. Nick Sheridan xx

 Clearly, three very different interpretations of the same basic text. Admittedly these are very facetious and intentionally misleading examples, and come from a part of the text where the actual situation is explained almost instantly after, but they serve very well to highlight how selection of images can change interpretation of an unfamiliar text.

 From the same book, here's another example.
I'm really not a fan of image memes. They reduce conversation to catchphrases and stifle creativity in a way that doesn't let good ideas develop into better ones. They're lazy, trite, easily dismissed and instantly forgotten. They're the Christmas cracker jokes of digital communication. But what I'm finding worse is this growing trend of taking a quote from a TV show, film or book and pasting it over the top of a (usually) relevant still. They're insulting to both the medium and the context of the remark. Often the text will be a bastardisation of the original script, and the image used will be from a completely different point in the film, or be a production still. They serve absolutely no purpose other than to make those already familiar with the film or show nod with a sort of lazy nostalgia, acknowledging that yes this film was a thing and it was good, but then not taking any discussion further than the "like" button. They completely alienate anyone who isn't familiar with the original text, providing no explanation of context and generating responses of either confusion or a sort of lazy indifferent curiosity. If anyone is actually encouraged to seek out the original text, their viewing or enjoyment is askew from the start, because the significance of the scene depicted in the meme overrides what would be a normal viewing experience. They're waiting for the relevant scene, or expecting the entire text to hang off of it. When we recommend a film to someone, we don't (unless we're 10 years old) say "Oh it was awesome, there was this one scene when..." but rather tell them what the film is about, or who is in it and what style or genre it is.Much, much worse than all this though, is when people start to post passages from books over supposedly relevant images. Books, decent grown-up books, as a rule, do not have pictures. Pictures and scenes are formed by the reader during the process of reading. If an image or scene is provided for them, something is taken away from the reading process. This is why chosing cover art is so important, and why it can sometimes go so very wrong. To illustrate my point I've pulled the following quote from the opening of Charlotte Brontë's "Jane Eyre" and pasted it over a seemingly relevant image. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Nothing untoward there, readers of the book will acknowledge the relevance, while those unfamiliar with it will get the right idea. But here's the text again with three different images. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Clearly, three very different interpretations of the same basic text. Admittedly these are very facetious and intentionally misleading examples, and come from a part of the text where the actual situation is explained almost instantly after, but they serve very well to highlight how selection of images can change interpretation of an unfamiliar text. From the same book, here's another example. To further illustrate the point, I'm going to do the same to a line from a book I haven't read but intend to, "Prophecy" by Peter James. I don't know if the character is supposed to be drunk, or even if they're consuming alcohol. I don't know if they're at a table or where they are, but that image is now solidified, and could easily colour my reading when I finally take "Prophecy" to task and dismantle it for Crap Looking Books. So if you want to recommend a book to someone online then do it exactly how you would in person- tell them what genre it is, tell them what it's about and what the themes are. Don't construct them images, throw out lines of dialogue or describe specific scenes or plot threads. It's no better than reciting the "Is this a dagger I see before me?" speech and instantly expecting those listening to understand or care about Macbeth. It is insulting to the format, insulting to the craft of writing, and insulting to the creative processes that went into making the story. Share more books. Nick Sheridan xxI'm really not a fan of image memes. They reduce conversation to catchphrases and stifle creativity in a way that doesn't let good ideas develop into better ones. They're lazy, trite, easily dismissed and instantly forgotten. They're the Christmas cracker jokes of digital communication. But what I'm finding worse is this growing trend of taking a quote from a TV show, film or book and pasting it over the top of a (usually) relevant still. They're insulting to both the medium and the context of the remark. Often the text will be a bastardisation of the original script, and the image used will be from a completely different point in the film, or be a production still. They serve absolutely no purpose other than to make those already familiar with the film or show nod with a sort of lazy nostalgia, acknowledging that yes this film was a thing and it was good, but then not taking any discussion further than the "like" button. They completely alienate anyone who isn't familiar with the original text, providing no explanation of context and generating responses of either confusion or a sort of lazy indifferent curiosity. If anyone is actually encouraged to seek out the original text, their viewing or enjoyment is askew from the start, because the significance of the scene depicted in the meme overrides what would be a normal viewing experience. They're waiting for the relevant scene, or expecting the entire text to hang off of it. When we recommend a film to someone, we don't (unless we're 10 years old) say "Oh it was awesome, there was this one scene when..." but rather tell them what the film is about, or who is in it and what style or genre it is.Much, much worse than all this though, is when people start to post passages from books over supposedly relevant images. Books, decent grown-up books, as a rule, do not have pictures. Pictures and scenes are formed by the reader during the process of reading. If an image or scene is provided for them, something is taken away from the reading process. This is why chosing cover art is so important, and why it can sometimes go so very wrong. To illustrate my point I've pulled the following quote from the opening of Charlotte Brontë's "Jane Eyre" and pasted it over a seemingly relevant image. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Nothing untoward there, readers of the book will acknowledge the relevance, while those unfamiliar with it will get the right idea. But here's the text again with three different images. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Clearly, three very different interpretations of the same basic text. Admittedly these are very facetious and intentionally misleading examples, and come from a part of the text where the actual situation is explained almost instantly after, but they serve very well to highlight how selection of images can change interpretation of an unfamiliar text. From the same book, here's another example. To further illustrate the point, I'm going to do the same to a line from a book I haven't read but intend to, "Prophecy" by Peter James. I don't know if the character is supposed to be drunk, or even if they're consuming alcohol. I don't know if they're at a table or where they are, but that image is now solidified, and could easily colour my reading when I finally take "Prophecy" to task and dismantle it for Crap Looking Books. So if you want to recommend a book to someone online then do it exactly how you would in person- tell them what genre it is, tell them what it's about and what the themes are. Don't construct them images, throw out lines of dialogue or describe specific scenes or plot threads. It's no better than reciting the "Is this a dagger I see before me?" speech and instantly expecting those listening to understand or care about Macbeth. It is insulting to the format, insulting to the craft of writing, and insulting to the creative processes that went into making the story. Share more books. Nick Sheridan xx
  
To further illustrate the point, I'm going to do the same to a line from a book I haven't read but intend to, Prophecy by Peter James.

I'm really not a fan of image memes. They reduce conversation to catchphrases and stifle creativity in a way that doesn't let good ideas develop into better ones. They're lazy, trite, easily dismissed and instantly forgotten. They're the Christmas cracker jokes of digital communication. But what I'm finding worse is this growing trend of taking a quote from a TV show, film or book and pasting it over the top of a (usually) relevant still. They're insulting to both the medium and the context of the remark. Often the text will be a bastardisation of the original script, and the image used will be from a completely different point in the film, or be a production still. They serve absolutely no purpose other than to make those already familiar with the film or show nod with a sort of lazy nostalgia, acknowledging that yes this film was a thing and it was good, but then not taking any discussion further than the "like" button. They completely alienate anyone who isn't familiar with the original text, providing no explanation of context and generating responses of either confusion or a sort of lazy indifferent curiosity. If anyone is actually encouraged to seek out the original text, their viewing or enjoyment is askew from the start, because the significance of the scene depicted in the meme overrides what would be a normal viewing experience. They're waiting for the relevant scene, or expecting the entire text to hang off of it. When we recommend a film to someone, we don't (unless we're 10 years old) say "Oh it was awesome, there was this one scene when..." but rather tell them what the film is about, or who is in it and what style or genre it is.Much, much worse than all this though, is when people start to post passages from books over supposedly relevant images. Books, decent grown-up books, as a rule, do not have pictures. Pictures and scenes are formed by the reader during the process of reading. If an image or scene is provided for them, something is taken away from the reading process. This is why chosing cover art is so important, and why it can sometimes go so very wrong. To illustrate my point I've pulled the following quote from the opening of Charlotte Brontë's "Jane Eyre" and pasted it over a seemingly relevant image. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Nothing untoward there, readers of the book will acknowledge the relevance, while those unfamiliar with it will get the right idea. But here's the text again with three different images. There was no possibility of taking a walk that day Clearly, three very different interpretations of the same basic text. Admittedly these are very facetious and intentionally misleading examples, and come from a part of the text where the actual situation is explained almost instantly after, but they serve very well to highlight how selection of images can change interpretation of an unfamiliar text. From the same book, here's another example. To further illustrate the point, I'm going to do the same to a line from a book I haven't read but intend to, "Prophecy" by Peter James. I don't know if the character is supposed to be drunk, or even if they're consuming alcohol. I don't know if they're at a table or where they are, but that image is now solidified, and could easily colour my reading when I finally take "Prophecy" to task and dismantle it for Crap Looking Books. So if you want to recommend a book to someone online then do it exactly how you would in person- tell them what genre it is, tell them what it's about and what the themes are. Don't construct them images, throw out lines of dialogue or describe specific scenes or plot threads. It's no better than reciting the "Is this a dagger I see before me?" speech and instantly expecting those listening to understand or care about Macbeth. It is insulting to the format, insulting to the craft of writing, and insulting to the creative processes that went into making the story. Share more books. Nick Sheridan xx
I don't know if the character is supposed to be drunk, or even if they're consuming alcohol. I don't know if they're at a table or where they are, but that image is now solidified, and could easily colour my reading when I finally take Prophecy to task and dismantle it for Crap Looking Books. 

So if you want to recommend a book to someone online then do it exactly how you would in person- tell them what genre it is, tell them what it's about and what the themes are. Don't construct them images, throw out lines of dialogue or describe specific scenes or plot threads.  

It's no better than reciting the "Is this a dagger I see before me?" speech and instantly expecting those listening to understand or care about Macbeth. It is insulting to the format, insulting to the craft of writing, and insulting to the creative processes that went into making the story.

Share more books.

Nick
xx 
Posted by at 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday 7 March 2013

Crap Looking Books #7: Nicci Gerrard's Things We Knew Were True

Initially, Nicci Gerrard's Things We Knew Were True comes across as a rather obvious woman's book. We know this because of the abundance of pink on the cover. We know this because of the ladies dresser complete with pink flowers, pink lipstick, pink make-up dust and a pink-lined compact mirror. They're all in front of pink wallpaper. The author's name and book title are in a soft inoffensive font, while the reviews are in- that's right- pink.
Amazingly, this isn't the worst thing about the cover. No, the worst thing is the publisher's favourite review, so lovingly plastered at the top of the pinkness:
#FF8888, am I right?
"A very clever book about female sexual desire, with a secret ending."

 This tells me two things. Firstly, the book has an unexpected ending. Secondly, the book is so light and insubstantial that it requires telegraphing the ending on the cover in order to pique and keep readers interests. 

So before even opening this novel I expected the cliché pink tropes of "ladies literature"... fainting, romance, indecision, dress-shopping ...erm... quilt-making... and I expected none of it to matter because the ending was going to be so cataclysmic and different.

 Well... thankfully this is one of those instances when I couldn't be more wrong.

 The book doesn't feel feminine or ladylike in any respect. yes, there are a lot of female characters, all dealing with growing pains or the dramas of their twilight years, but there is nothing specifically gendered about what they go through. In fact all the genders in the book could be inverted, or replaced with a commune of homosocial/homosexual individuals, and the story would still make just as much sense.

One thing I found hard to get over was the utterly bizarre ritual of what can only be described as chaperoned sex parties, where kids went to drink and kiss and indulge each other sexually, then were picked up by cheerful beaming parents in the early hours of the morning. I'm not sure what Nicci Gerrard's childhood was like, but these parties seemed like some weird forced breeding plan straight out of dystopian science fiction, and they certainly don't scan with the shocked and stoic attitudes towards sex the adults show in later chapters. 
As the end of the book drew near all I could think about was the "secret ending" and what it would mean for the story. Five pages from the end my hands were shaking with anticipation. Either that or I had to wee. Two sentences... one sentence.. two words.. a word... oh. Either someone's been ripping pages out of my copy, or the "secret ending" was missing entirely. 

 Perhaps the "secret ending" was just the ending, hidden as it was at the back of the book, a place the publishers didn't expect any readers to actually reach.

 This is exactly the kind of gem that I'm glad Crap Looking Books occasionally coughs up- a good read in a bad cover.. but it's also a little infuriating. I would go as far to say that the cover has absolutely nothing to do with the book, and inasmuch could easily deter a whole slew of readers that might potentially enjoy it.

 It's a book that's both depressingly uplifting and upliftingly depressing. A pointless but pointed story of how generations of the same family make the same mistakes as they embark on the great journey of just living one day after the other.

 It's The Crow Road with less men and a much smaller ensemble, and despite it's banality I can't hate on it because it's exactly the kind of thing that l myself write. 

 Nick
xx
Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday 5 March 2013

Everything must go! Unless it already has...

So I was a little disappointed yesterday while picking through the corpse of a flagging UK media retailer HMV. Not because there were no good books on their rapidly reducing shelves, but because they're were no bad ones. Fact is there were plenty of good books on offer, so many that I had to stay my hand from buying them, because my quality "to read" pile is too high already.

[Pinch your irony here]

This all has me a little worried that my shopping and research drives are starting to set themselves at odds with my enjoyment... it feels like I'm training myself to get a kick out of these bad titles and terrible covers that are so easy to pull apart, and might never be able to get back in the mindset of getting good feelings from things that are, well... good.

But I'm also concerned as to why there were no bad books on the shelves in HMV (let's put aside the argument that there is no such thing as a bad book, because so help me, there is).

Are the stockists and merchandisers that good at their jobs that the right products are on the right shelves? If that's the case, and persons of such quality are working for them, then why in the world are they going out of business?


no book worth having comes easy
It seems both likelier and fantastical that their shop assistants have until now been pushing the wrong products, sending customers home with all those dreadful texts wrapped in horrible imagery that are now missing from the shelves. It would explain why those inevitably disappointed customers and their cash never returned, and why the stores are going under.

It strikes me that had voracious readers know that decent quality books were on the shelves, we might have rushed along to snap them up and thus saved the unfortunate store from plunging into the depths of administration. Such a waste...


 An ultimately more terrifying notion perhaps is that me and this blog are just part of a growing trend, and crap looking books are being snapped up all over by excited and ironic readers and critics alike. If that's so then my job is going to get harder... and the hunt for book-fodder is going to get a whole lot more exciting.

 Nick
xx
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Are you looking for This Is Where The Voices Go? It's over at www.NickSheridan.com!

Crap Looking Books is all about intentionally judging books by their covers, and finding out whether or not those judgements are right! It's not about taking a swing at popular trash fiction, or rubbishing on (SOMETHING). Head on over to our Facebook page to join the debate and make suggestions for future books you want to see judged,