This is how we procrastinate

I am trying so hard to write this book review, but my brain is completely empty. I read the book without taking notes because I wanted to get an overall impression before I started coming up with specifics for the review. (See, I was trying to write as I read for the intro and realized that I wasn't giving the book a fair shot, so I removed all writing implements and just read.) Now I wish I had the notes because my brain is dead. I have written the bibliographic entry. That's it.

I like the book. The author sets out to do too much for a book of this length, and her theses are all over the place (yes, plural, meaning more than one thesis), and she doesn't really say anything new about my field, but she does make some interesting arguments about the main field discussed in the book (not one of my areas), though she doesn't use much current criticism that would support her argument and instead relies on close textual analysis and refuting older (possibly dated) critics. She also ignores a very popular and moneymaking trend in the primary field and doesn't at all mention any texts that don't fit with her argument (an explanation of why she wasn't looking at X group of texts would have been nice). This is a let's-connect-primary-field-to-secondary-(my)-field book, but I'm not sure why the connection is necessary. It really doesn't help her argument; just provides a metaphor for the book and some historical context. But my field could be totally excised from the book and it wouldn't make a lick of difference to the argument. I do like the book, I just don't know what to say about it.

Gah. I had plenty of specific things to say before I sat down at the computer. But they evaporated. I guess I can use this post as a starting place.