99 Following

book reviews forevermore

Goodreads refugee and wordpress blogger


“The more I read, the more I acquire, the more certain I am that I know nothing.”
― Voltaire

Non Censure

Non Censure - Ute Lemper I did not read this book, but I do believe in the concept. Within reason, of course. I'm not a supporter of hate speech, but that's precisely why free discussion about a book and its author needs to be part of a review. If the author supports ASPCA, I want to know. If the author donates money and uses their public voice to speak out against gay civil rights, I want to know that too. It impacts my perception of their work and its meaning to me.

It may mean I have to wrestle harder with the dichotomies between the two. It may mean the bump up to five stars, because not only is the book fabulous, but I can recommend them without any reservations. Goodreads has suddenly instituted a statement about why they will be deleting reviews that discuss author behavior if they are flagged. They announced this in the Feedback Group--if you aren't a member or don't read your digests, you might not know this. Goodreads claims it is part of Terms of Service, which you are agreeing to every time you check into Goodreads. Realism aside, it does not speak well of customer service or openness in dialogue with the GR community.

My apologies to my friends for the recommendation spam. It won't happen again, I assure you.