Thread:D2r/@comment-3148757-20120715202352/@comment-1479469-20120715204654

I should note that I haven't read the later books, so I can only really offer advice on the format. Based on the degradation of quality I observed in "Loamhedge", though, I assume your points are right.

One quibble - I did read Triss, and while the ending was disappointing, I do sort of understand why he did it - it emphasized Kurda's craven nature, after all. But it's not one of his strongest works to begin with.

I would note that the piece is mostly plot summary followed by a few sentences of your own thoughts (especially in the case of your entry on "Eulalia"). While fine for an internet op-ed, if you're looking for improvement, I would spend less time summarizing the books (after all, people who come looking for opinions on the books have probably read them already & aren't looking for summary), and more time discussing and elaborating your opinions. If it's an opinion piece, the primary thing it should contain is YOUR OPINION, rather than plot summary - and your opinion should be a bit more fleshed out.

Oh, and the bottom dig at Jacques seems a little un-necessary. God knows I'm a pretty vicious critic of "Redwall" myself, but the last sentence is an unqualified personal attack on Jacques, and I don't think that's what you intended. You could improve it by using more neutral terms, i.e. "I feel that the quality of Jacques' writing had gone downhill since Triss, to the point where subsequent entries were just rehashes of the same ground" or something similar.

All my best,

-d2r