Not very impressed with DID LIZZIE BORDEN AXE FOR IT.

[Elizabelle]

I received the book today and read it all in one setting.

I can't even begin to describe my annoyance with the numerous spelling, punctuation, & grammatical errors that I found. If it was me, I would fire the editor who let all these glaring mistakes make it into print. But wait...if it was me, there wouldn't be that many errors because I am a perfectionist, and a down-right fanatic when it comes to spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc.

Taking a book seriously, for me, depends on the quality of it. Along with the numerous errors (which were driving me bonkers), the quality of the photos also left a lot to be desired.

All in all, I wasn't very impressed.

The stories, or "impressions," of Lizzie toward the end of the book were juvenile, and over-all, just not very well written. Much of the latter part of the book seemed thrown together in haste to bulk up the content and add to the number of pages.

There wasn't any unique in-depth insight or inspiring theories/conclusions. It was just a "so-so" read for a lazy Thursday afternoon.

On a scale of 1-10, I would give this book a 5.

[theebmonique]

Here are some more thoughts on the Rehak book:

viewtopic.php?t=1401&highlight=rehak


Tracy...

[Yooper]

Perhaps the title is an indicator of the content in this case. Well, look at it this way, it might have been more irritating if a truly innovative and inspired book had suffered from sloppy publishing!

Thanks for the review, I'll put that book off until much later!

[RayS]

I really don't know how a library decides to buy a book. The "Virginia Kirkus Review" analyzes books and reports on them. That can be a decision point for a library. Visit your local bookstore chain to see if they have a copy, then browse it.
I use two tests for any book I might read.
1) What kind of pictures are in it? Novels don't have pictures.
2) What does the author say about a subject that you know about?

These tests are not fool-proof. If you don't know anything, #2 fails.
Some history books have only drawings, not paintings (before 1840s).

[1bigsteve]

I received the book today and read it all in one setting.

I can't even begin to describe my annoyance with the numerous spelling, punctuation, & grammatical errors that I found. If it was me, I would fire the editor who let all these glaring mistakes make it into print. But wait...if it was me, there wouldn't be that many errors because I am a perfectionist, and a down-right fanatic when it comes to spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc.

Taking a book seriously, for me, depends on the quality of it. Along with the numerous errors (which were driving me bonkers), the quality of the photos also left a lot to be desired.

All in all, I wasn't very impressed.

The stories, or "impressions," of Lizzie toward the end of the book were juvenile, and over-all, just not very well written. Much of the latter part of the book seemed thrown together in haste to bulk up the content and add to the number of pages.

There wasn't any unique in-depth insight or inspiring theories/conclusions. It was just a "so-so" read for a lazy Thursday afternoon.

On a scale of 1-10, I would give this book a 5.

So, you are a perfectionist with grammer and spelling, Elizabelle? So is that "setting" or "sitting?" I just couldn't resist that. I'm just a big tease.

My spelling and punctuation has got to be the worst. It was a whole lot better when I was in the third grade but the older I get the worse it gets. I just bought some books on grammer, spelling and punctuation I have to get into.

I know what you mean, Elizabelle. I hate to see glaring mistakes in books that should have been proof read. It makes you wonder what was going on. Bad paper, poor design and bad or no photographs also iratate me to no end. My biggest peeve is the senseless wordiness of many books. In some books there is about 40 pages of important information and the remaining 590 pages is just brainless filler. Do authors get paid by the word?

Thanks for the heads up on that book, Elizabelle. I'll save my money.

-1bigsteve (o:

[snokkums]

I know, there were alot of grammical errors in the book, and some of the stuff was a bit off.
It was an ok book, I read it too.

[matt kevin jones]

Speaking of Errors in books
On the back cover of Victoria Lincolns Book ( Paperback )
It states the Murder happened on August 14 1892
I noticed that right away. It was August 4 1892
Or am I in Error Too ??

[1bigsteve]

Speaking of Errors in books
On the back cover of Victoria Lincolns Book ( Paperback )
It states the Murder happened on August 14 1892
I noticed that right away. It was August 4 1892
Or am I in Error Too ??

August 04, 1892. You are right, Matt.

Maybe the Editors of those books should send them here to get proof read.

-1bigsteve (o:

[william]

That is your punishment, Matt, for not buying the hard copy.

(Lighten up, everybody. I'm just joking.)

[Kat]

We have the paperback and I never noticed that!

There are some screwy back-of-book synopsis out there! Who writes that stuff?

[augusta]

Sometimes magazines will pay a writer by the word; sometimes it's one lump sum. No, books don't pay by the word.

I have the book but have not read it. I was quoted in places without being asked, and I don't know if things attributed to me were actual and accurate quotes.

I did give permission for the photo of the Swansea house to be used.

That's all I'm gonna say about it.

[Roy Nickerson]

I just ordered it used from Amazon Marketplace (because I do not wish to contribute anything to Mr. Rehak's income).
Once I've read it I may make comment on it here but, then again, perhaps not as it would probably be colored by my dislike of the author.

[Wordweaver]

We have the paperback and I never noticed that!

There are some screwy back-of-book synopsis out there! Who writes that stuff?

(raising my hand) I've been paid to write cover copy.

Depending on the publisher, the book's editor or someone from the marketing department may write the copy. The editor is likely to be familiar with the book's contents, but the marketing person is usually working from a questionnaire the author filled out and may or may not have time to read the book itself. (May not, in fact, have access to the manuscript.)

And proofreading seems to be a lost art. As long as copy can go through a spellcheck, it can contain all sorts of errors, up to and including the worst of all publishing sins: misspelling the author's name.

The back cover of the first paperback edition of Fowler's English Usage referred to its importance in "grammer."

Lynn

[Pippi]

I find it interesting that you disliked the book so much and with it's factual errors you still give it a 5 on a 1-10 scale. It must not be THAT bad?? Or...am I just really hard on book like bob lol! With your description Elizabelle I'd think you would have given it a 2. I"m glad I have all of you to bounce book ideas off of so i don't waste my money. I'm sticking to my Rebello....I was a fool when I didn't snatch up the Knowlton Papers at a decent price.

[Roy Nickerson]

I've just finished reading Mr. Rehak's book....hmmm.
It's a very odd and quirky pastiche of rambling essays, short fictional pieces, poetry, newspaper articles, etc. As previously mentioned, editing seems nonexistent, and the fictional pieces are no asset to the book. Mr. Rehak's apparent obsession with sexual matters is in evidence in places. This would not be annoying except that it seems gratuitous and does not inform the subject where it appears (Lizzie's fictional tryst, e.g.).
Still, I found myself reluctantly enjoying the book for the most part;
perhaps because it IS such an oddity. Where else would you find a paper doll style drawing of Lizzie in her skivvies?
Definitely NOT a great moment in Borden literature, but perhaps worth a look in the way that a train wreck is interesting to watch.
Lots of pictures of Faye, and even a couple of her essays, too (these seem fairly well written when stacked against Rehak's awkward construction and syntax).
I would recommend it only as a curiosity in the Borden body of literature.