"List of the Lost" review in The Daily Mail

This review is fairer and more restrained than most, and yet the poster of this item has to call the reviewer a wanker, apparently, which says far more about the artistic acumen and disinterestedness of some Morrissey fans than it does about Letts.
 
Well, what would you say about the artistic acumen of someone who is not a literature critic, but who is the author of "50 people who buggered up Britain"?
 
This review is fairer and more restrained than most, and yet the poster of this item has to call the reviewer a wanker, apparently, which says far more about the artistic acumen and disinterestedness of some Morrissey fans than it does about Letts.

Don't be silly. Even though Letts can't write for toffee, his review is 90% on the money. However, he's also a ginormous walking bell-end, and it would be remiss not to flag this up every time his name is mentioned, for the benefit of those who might not be aware.
 
To Benny-the-British-Butcher : are you Luke Haines (by chance) ?
 
Well, what would you say about the artistic acumen of someone who is not a literature critic, but who is the author of "50 people who buggered up Britain"?

Still better than that of many who post here, sadly.

Unfortunately, it's too late for this now, but I would have been very interested to see the results of an experiment in which a random sample of Morrissey fans were given various literary texts to read that they had not read before, and were not told, in advance, who the authors were, with List of the Lost being among those texts. The control group would be Morrissey fans who knew who the texts were written by.

I imagine that in the group who read anonymous texts there would be a far lower number of readers finding List of the Lost to be a work of genius.

My imagination doesn't prove anything, of course, but I can see people straining here, in the comments, against all credibility, to believe that Morrissey has some sort of artistic Midas touch and is beyond the criticism of mere mortals. When the hormones finally die down, they might wake one day with the taste of ashes in their mouths and realise, rather sheepishly, that they've been had.
 
Still better than that of many who post here, sadly.

Unfortunately, it's too late for this now, but I would have been very interested to see the results of an experiment in which a random sample of Morrissey fans were given various literary texts to read that they had not read before, and were not told, in advance, who the authors were, with List of the Lost being among those texts. The control group would be Morrissey fans who knew who the texts were written by.

I imagine that in the group who read anonymous texts there would be a far lower number of readers finding List of the Lost to be a work of genius.

My imagination doesn't prove anything, of course, but I can see people straining here, in the comments, against all credibility, to believe that Morrissey has some sort of artistic Midas touch and is beyond the criticism of mere mortals. When the hormones finally die down, they might wake one day with the taste of ashes in their mouths and realise, rather sheepishly, that they've been had.

The views of the book here seem rather to me to be predominantly very negative. And the few who have given a differing view seem to me for the most part to have motivated their assessment reasonably.

In any case, the standard of posters on any message board is hardly a benchmark for what you expect from a reviewer in a major national daily.
 
no blind test, no test at all, would have saved list of the lost. from beginning to end, its unreadable.
 
This review is fairer and more restrained than most, and yet the poster of this item has to call the reviewer a wanker, apparently, which says far more about the artistic acumen and disinterestedness of some Morrissey fans than it does about Letts.

Post your artistic acumen test, Toot, and perhaps the admin will only allow those who meet your standards to comment on such matters from now on.
 
sorry mate, but anyone who thinks this is a proper book is either
1 blind
2 from a non english speaking country

it is debateable as to whether its even written in english.
 
This review is fairer and more restrained than most, and yet the poster of this item has to call the reviewer a wanker, apparently, which says far more about the artistic acumen and disinterestedness of some Morrissey fans than it does about Letts.


Honestly though, Letts is an absolutely awful person. I don't know why you want to defend him. He IS a wanker.
 
sorry mate, but anyone who thinks this is a proper book is either
1 blind
2 from a non english speaking country

it is debateable as to whether its even written in english.

Maybe The Wretch wrote it via ouija board.
 
P-u-s-h-o-ff
 
there's a dozen excerpts from this...and over the years i used to think he'd be suited for writing. i remember reading that James Dean bio from his earlier days and liked it because it was kind of entertaining. but this reads like a word salad...kind of makes me depressed really. i used to write depraved shit like this when i was a teenager.

if nothing else it makes one curious as to what's really going on in that head of his every he's not working...since his day job is already colored and shaped by an abnormal psychology, clearly
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom