SwansSoilMe/SwansSaveMe
Chymist
I must've been afraid to say before, but here goes a final thought, having read only 51 pages:
It's either a case of tired mind while I'm reading it, or else...there have been maybe three passages so far, usually among the densest, which come off as a little too obtuse, too "re-read-y" (like about three times each). Usually it's around two long sentences worth right in the middle of a killer thought. Also, sometimes thoughts are left incomplete, or seemingly; to wit: page 49, "Leaving aside reincarnation..." Enlightenment is said here to have "nothing on" heaven or Valhalla; but the paragraph goes on to merely describe how enlightenment seems to be superior, never does it return to why or in what way it lacks the glamor of those two religious "theme parks." Admittedly such a statement need only be brief, but there. And next up is a new parag. and train of thought... So at times, thought-couplets could follow more parallel structure for better clarity. Something like that...like sometimes things are too splicy. A reread by the author, I have to think, will pick this up.
It's either a case of tired mind while I'm reading it, or else...there have been maybe three passages so far, usually among the densest, which come off as a little too obtuse, too "re-read-y" (like about three times each). Usually it's around two long sentences worth right in the middle of a killer thought. Also, sometimes thoughts are left incomplete, or seemingly; to wit: page 49, "Leaving aside reincarnation..." Enlightenment is said here to have "nothing on" heaven or Valhalla; but the paragraph goes on to merely describe how enlightenment seems to be superior, never does it return to why or in what way it lacks the glamor of those two religious "theme parks." Admittedly such a statement need only be brief, but there. And next up is a new parag. and train of thought... So at times, thought-couplets could follow more parallel structure for better clarity. Something like that...like sometimes things are too splicy. A reread by the author, I have to think, will pick this up.