No? The gist of Donahue's glib is not enlightening in the least and only offers to its reader a fan gushing over its subject without a need to open up and critically examine it from all sides. Pieces such as these are negative because of the precedent their attachment to this site presents. The Onion A.V. Club, a site…
pintobeans
avclub-570c933ca2bb5786896f9954a882cc47--disqus
What does it matter? I've been a long time lurker and have used names in the past, but that is besides the point. Does this ad hominem tactic of referring to the number of posts I have made make my voice any less worthy of being heard than yours?
It ceases to be "hyperbolic" when the content therein does little to deflate the subject's header. Through and through it remains as committed to the inane premise without any snark and writing that showcases views coming from somebody who seems about as dim as a lightbulb:
I get the impression that Literature reviews on this site are based purely as a result on the reviewer's own personal takeaway than stocked against the western canon or some other precedent in the literature world. Makes me wish somebody as tough as Donna Bowman tackled more book reviews.