Log in

No account? Create an account
bear by san

March 2017



Powered by LiveJournal.com
criminal minds hotch shades of justice

when you look up at the sky all you see are zeros, all you see are zeros and ones

Screw it. I'm not finding anything wrong in here. And I'm going blind looking.

If anybody noticed anything wrong in the trade edition of Blood & Iron, now is the time to comment and point it out. And by wrong, I mean typos, not "The plot!"

Yeah, I know you all this well.


Onward to the CEM!


And by wrong, I mean typos, not "The plot!"

You spoil allllllllllllll our fun!

Is this the blog version of the thing where you write whatever you know will torture the characters most effectively?

I'm still reading Dust so I haven't read your Dust threads or posts yet - saving them up. I'm about 2/3 through so far and I really really have to bone up on my Arthurian legends - I'm sure that I'm missing nearly as many jokes as I know I miss with the Criminal Minds reviews by not knowing it... but even without, I have been spending almost all my "reading ability" for each day reading Dust instead of fanfic[1]!

[1] This is High Praise Indeed :)
You won't miss anything vital, I promise.
How many more layers would I get by knowing though? Trouble is, it's a dammed hard thing to study...

You know? You'd probably get some more nuance. But that's the way allusions go--they're sort of a way for one subconscious to communicate with another.

Like the Star Trek episode where Picard is teaching the guy about Gilgamesh....
"Darmok." Seriously, my all-time favorite ep of any version of Trek. That episode ROCKED. So did Paul Winfield (RIP).
You are so my hero.
Well, you do have some funny squiggly thingy in the title, but I thought it wasn't my place to say anything.

*sends in the maneating owls*
If somebody would send their feeble aged parents their christmas ration of books, then one's FAP could get to make snarkey comments too.
When I have money, I will mail things.

Complain to New York....
Ok.. whaddyawhaddayawhaddaya? Dint work.
Just finished the re-read, and nothing leapt out at me like a leaping missing 'had' or anything (Dust, p200. And either I was misreading or there's a had/has confusion on p302. This is not of any help currently, is it? Sorry.) but I wasn't doing my gimlet-eyed waiting-to-catch-'em-out thing either, which only normally happens when I find gratuitous continuity fups that stay on the page when I re-read it.
Spotting typos in a poorly copyedited mass market paperback is pretty much useless. Sorry.

If you spot something in a trade or hardcover, you can do something about it when it goes to mass market. Mass markets are mass markets. They don't go to new editions.