No Compatibility.

No Compatibility.
Daniel Thomas Mann

Thought-provoking, extraordinary, formidable, engrossing, provocative, baffling, unconventional. What comes to mind? Salvador Dali using multiple brushes, tints of a myriad colour, depositing paint on his canvas to create images from his conscious or subconscious mind to shape art with or without the ability of others to logically comprehend his intententions, or productions - but who cares? He has created some of the best pieces the world has ever seen. How can a gloss be put over existentialism? Is it easy to comprehend a meaning in the time-portal of existentialism before the forty-eight seconds lapsed and the interlock exploded? Good grief (!) - as a lay person, I think your philosophical theories and imaginations reflected here are interesting and written in an authoritative manner. "Thought" processes, "thought" issues are of course crucial to man and it is reassuring to see that some among us are at least still "thinking". Dominic Clover seems an interseting character, trying to balance the past and present with the future. A lot of food for thought in this piece - alas, as a lay person with little or no training in philosophy, there is little I can say by way of constructive criticism. Some stimulation of the grey matter is alwys of course welcome - nice way to start my day so thanks and good luck with this. NO problem backing it.
Zan

No Compatibility is the most complex piece of manuscript I have ever read. However, I salute you. I like a challenge. This story is also fascinating. Your attention to detail is immaculate. Your descriptions are beyond expectation. Its packed with poetic punches. Its intriguing. I thought you were describing the twin tower of 9/11 at one point. Then I realised you weren't. Well, I think you were in Clover's world of complexity and crisis of identity.
I respect your style and presentation but I must point out a bit of grammatical contamination in chapter one. I read thus far. Half way down you started a paragraph with a common letter or lower case. "If numerical order was a resemblance of order, then the...." You broke there then start a new paragraph that should be part of the mentioned with "corridor".
Anyway, a delightful read. I'll be back for chapter two.
highly starred

G’day! Daniel Thomas Mann

I have a topic running titled: DOWN UNDER WRITERS OF DISTINCTION.

A call for names of Aussie and Kiwi writers did lead to somebody putting your name forward. Now I’m told, your entry is in error.

May I ask you please to clarify the matter for me?

Thank you,
Regards,
KEN BLOWERS
Brisbane, Australia
For your readers who don’t know me so well,
I’m no novelist, but I have put up
6 books of short stories, and
5 books of one-act plays.
Plus a book of 1,000 daily quotations
ttp://www.authonomy.com/writing-community/profile/me/
My topic: DOWN-UNDER WRITERS OF DISTINCTION
http://www.authonomy.com/forums/threads/92659/downunder-writers-of-distinction-/

An amusing, descriptive and well written book. Your writing style is very impressive, dialogue are entertaining with vivid charachters and narrative is at great pace. Highly rated.

I went back to chapter one Daniel and you have cleaned it up a bit. That hard-edged story is still in there but the dialogue is rockin man! This world you have created with it's inconguence and orchestrated chaos is again to be commended. I hear echoes of "A Brief History Of Time" by Stephen Hawking in here or the elusive unified theory. I'll read on but I'll get you to my watchlist shortly. Tremendous job and great concept again!--JL "The Devil Of Black Bayou."

Daniel your eye for the technical aspects of geometric shapes and attempt to bring string theory into a linear progression should be commended. You do need to edit this though. You have a great concept here. Build your character Dominic Clover and give him flesh and frailty to bring a little humanistic empathy to the reader. You start strong almost with "A Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy" writing style then shift around especially at the introduction of a women in a dilapidated structure. Incorporate better descriptions of your characters and edit a bit and you'll have one Hell of a novel.--JL "The Devil Of Black Bayou"

Dear Daniel,

Other than mine own, this is my favorite book here on Authonomy of the hundreds I've read and commented on. It is just the kind of book which I would like to reread over again, and so I will. I think that, on a different book you may write, not this one, you would thrive by blending the voices of hundreds of characters, so your style can adapt to. I think No Compatibility is a book which many readers will like to spend time meditating over. Thanks for sharing it with me.

Billy McBride ("Spaceflight")

Wow. My first thought is that you probably have a very high IQ. Your writing is brilliant; very scientific. I had to purposely pay attention because I am anything but science minded, but it did all make perfect sense and was again, quite brilliant. You have perfect word choice and flow. It was a big read but still flowed. I am very impressed. This is different than any other book I've read here. I liked it's uniqueness. I see what you mean by show and tell; your book did a lot of telling, but it needed to. Good job. 6 stars. Lacy

Go fOrth with this book, Daniel and I Sense you Will Achieve The Credentials tHat you need In your life. Never Give Years tO a ventUre that only takes days.

Dude, what is going on in there? I honestly have no idea, and I'm not stupid. Perhaps lazy but definitely not stupid and yet this makes me feel very dense.
I had to scroll down to a few other comments just to make sure I wasn't the only one.
I'm sorry man, but this did not read like a novel. Advanced physics made more sense to me. Perhaps I'm just not smart enough
I thought the long pitch was a little confusing, you can imagine how I feel about the actual content.
Wow ... I have to say, it's definitely something new, but it's just not for me. It reads like a textbook and I honestly hated school.
Though-provoking? Yes, a little too much.

Clearly you are an NHS manager.

If this is an exercise in redundancy, then you succeeded violently. I didn't think a person could say the same thing thing ten times, like the reader was to dumb to get it, and think to get away with it. And it seems to go from the architectural designer's POV to Clover's, or does Dominic know all of that about the structure. I'll have to finish it later, it takes time getting through the same used words, over and over again-- how about a thesaurus.

I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what this is all about.

Dear Daniel,

Reading through your pitch, I can see that you have deeped your thoughts into critical thinking. Bravo. It is thanks to such critical thinking that we have supersonic man's advancement. Unfortunately, critical thinking is not everyone's - that is why few people have been enlisted here and line is still not long and includes the all-times people like Isaac Newton as well as the currently living Steven Hawkings. Bravo.

I like the premise for this. This is not a genre I venture into often and I think that is why I found it hard to get a grasp on the story. The narrative is heavy. However, if I had the time to read more slowly, and offer the work my full concentration, I may find I get a lot out of it. I found the initial repetition a little off putting yet it helped me lock into the story that I was otherwise having slight trouble with. Because I know so little about this genre I don’t feel it is my place to comment further. I imagine for those who enjoy and intellectually challenging read this could prove very enjoyable.

This is an interesting book, Daniel. Unfortunately, completely beyond me at the moment. I might come back to take a look at it in the winter, when I have time to read slowly and carefully. I love a good philosophical read, but Alaskan summers are too frenetic to really do them justice and I do want to do this amazing book justice.

Lauri (Lela Markham - The Willow Branch)

No Compatability,
Fiction, Sci-fi 3rd person

Premise: Interesting, a philisophical examination of good vs. evil in a 4 dimensional analysis.

Plot: After reading the whole of Ch 1, I found nothing to suggest a plot. Of course, this is all my opinion and I probably don't know anything and most likely know less than the author of this piece.

POV. 3rd person. The MC is the narrator.

Pacing: IMO, this would read much more smoothly if there was less repetition. The interruptions and restating an idea is confusing. Instead, I'd recommend stating the idea, then supporting it through the example without re-using the same wording. The sequence of Clover (interesting name, btw) breaking into the flat reads fluidly and has a dynamic pace.

Prose: There is a ton of thought-provoking prose. IMO, it would be better presented to use more showing vs. telling.

Mechanics: Aside from the repetition, the mechanics were clean and strong.

Overall: While this is an exceptionally thought provoking piece, if it is intended for a readership, I think it would benefit with some judicial editing. Repetition can be like machine-gun fire and sometimes it takes repetition to get an idea across. But, if nobody will read it because of the hammering effect, how successful is the story at getting the idea into the reader's mind? Not at all. How many of the readers here-in really grasp what is being said or even read beyond the first few paragraphs? When the story comes off like a falling building, most readers are going to duck and run.

I like the parallels and the metaphors. But the heavy handed style is a little over-whelming. The writing is getting in the way of the message. The narrative voice is so strong, it overwhelms the reader as a lecture, rather than a novel. If it isn't fiction, that is okay. But the intent of fiction is to entertain.

I hope this helps. I'm rather in awe of the philisophical attributes used and the intellect required to write this. I'd like to see it sharpened up as I think it has a tremendous message.

Raechel
Echo

This book flys like Zenoxs Arrow. Each point of it's flight divided and subdivided until the elements it measures conspire against its end.

I enjoyed the stark logic, and I am sure that Wittgenstein and Russel would be pleased to see what they inspire. The Quantum elements of this literary work allude to the idea of a super projected non-reality echoed from the Big Bang questioning neatly whether a end and a beginning can co-exist as separate entities or compromise to allow each other to simply be "there"...or is that "here"?

The use of a physical structure to hang the hat of these questions on is clever. It allows the author the opportunity to play with more than just the characters. It gives the elements around them a life/non-life of their own.

I found the book to be more of a study, and a slightly self indulgent demonstration of the authors philosophical ability. It exposes the tiger under every table, however it left me slightly disappointed and a little patronised.

I hope that the angst generated will not be wasted on a desire to demonstrate how clever the author is. It is clear from the construction and thought that has gone into this work there is formidable intellect behind it. However a reader wants a book of this type to be of some practical use. It is a shame that jargon should exclude so many from this work. Albert Camus and Sartre created an access route into this mode of thought, rather than continuing this I fear this book closes the door/portal with a sneer undermining the authors no doubt genuine intentions to provoke thought.

I will continue to back this book as it is an excellent exploration of philosophy. I hope that others will take the time to unlock the jargon and enter the door.

I have to say that this is like nothing else I've ever read. It isn't really something I would pick up on my own, but still an engrossing read. I must admit that you had me scratching my head at points. The only problem I think you may have is that everything is very repetitive. You go over and over everything, the smallest detail is bored into our brains. I just hope that the average reader who gets bored with repetition will read on to see how entertaining this is. Very intelligent piece of work.

Jennifer Beth
Toxic Blood

Daniel,
Amazing – I WL and starred. Just a few technical things – spelling (Clover realized should be realized; retract should be refract), commas missing, but all in all I got into the rhythm of your words. I liked the cadence and how you weave the sentences.
At first it felt like the first time I visited Warwick Castle or the Tower of London – amazed by the shear size and magnitude of the towers built by hand. And other more ancient places in Italy I visited which were in ruins, vandalized and I couldn’t believe the state of them. Then I got the sense that this was a space where time and the physical felt almost designed by a cross of M.C. Escher, Fibonacci, and Einstein – where opposites coexist in spiraling gradients – what an interesting mobius you painted – I was excited to keep going – as a student of metaphysics (and an engineer), you had me hooked. I took my time and enjoyed every sentence. It stretched my brain, getting my mind around all the concepts – but it was well worth it! I’m so excited that you asked me to read this.
Connie

Achilles Heart Series
Moonstone Beach

No Compatibility is probably one of the most interesting tomes I’ve read in a while. I say tome because even though only four chapters are posted, I feel like I’ve read volumes. This is not a bad thing. Author Daniel Thomas Mann’s work is thought-provoking and at times head-scratching. Yet, it moves ahead much the way a good Dr. Who episode does. I’m not going to pretend to be on the level of the author in terms of scientific awareness, but I think what is being done here is using science fiction to prove a point, to help readers expand their mind towards new possibilities. In a sense, all good science fiction literature does this, but the message of No Compatibility seems more in the forefront here, with less effort to camouflage it.

The writing and descriptions are strong and the dialog is good. The one thing I might suggest is to mix the two up a bit. For example, we have so much expository writing telling us the situation that we long for some dialog to give our minds a break. Then when we get it, the talking goes on for most of a chapter, to the point that we get a bit tired of that. Both are good, but if they could be mixed, a short conversation here, some more explanation there, then I think the high concepts of No Compatibility would be easier for those of us with smaller brains to digest and enjoy.

John Breeden II
Old Number Seven

Dear Daniel, I commented on your unique book 288 days ago. I stick to what I said then. It is impossible for me to understand why these people don't like it. You are up there with the Bolanos and Javier Mariases. The Spanish speakers are making true breakthroughs in the construction and content of the modern novel. I shall return to read more later. I'll back you asap. Best wishes, Gordon

This a different and interesting premise for a story. I believe that you do a lot of telling. I would like to see more showing. Backed. Lisa

Daniel,
"No Compatibility" is like Rubik's Cube. It confronts you. It does not invite you in. There is no nicety involved in a thrown gauntlet. You venture past the inscrutable facade because you are challenged. The more things are unraveled the farther you go in your exploration because you get a release of endorpohins with each discovery, thus making the whole exercise compulsive/addicitve. What a clever piece of work. Thanks for daring to be different.

Kenneth Edward Lim
The North Korean

Hi again Daniel,

I'm revisiting books I've read before for a 2nd look. I remember No Compatibility from the very 1st paragraph. It's such a distinctive work. Your writing is so clear and precise. Almost scientific in construction. And Clover's a really great character, much better than the cardboard cutouts that fill the pages of so many books. ;)

This newfangled starring system didn't exist when I was last here. So I'm giving you 6 stars right now. :)

I'd love this to get published. I think it's a remarkable read. :)

Pete

I tried to like this, but I just couldn't get myself to. You have, for my preferences, too many contradictions in your flow of thoughts, e.g. "sustained the unsustainbale", which made it dificult reading for me. There was a lot of repetition of the same word in places, particularly "Clover". I think it was overly complex in the way you presented these ideas - of which, due to the complexity in their description, I couldn't quite grasp.

You probably have the wrong person reading as the only philosophy I can read comfortably is Plato and Sartre, pretty much everyone else, particularly Hume, almost all goes over my head.

I owed you the read anyway, and judging by your profile I figured you'd want honesty over flattery.

Regards,
Joe

My response to this can be summed up in one word:

Why?

If you choose to hide whatever your 'meaning' may be in this sort of mish-mash then I can only assume that what you want to say is not worth saying.

Wow. There’s a lot going on here. Too much for my poor bewildered brain, in fact. You clearly love playing with language, but for me that makes for something that’s pretty hard to read. I’ve been a philosophy student in my time, so I’m not a stranger to the basic concepts you’re building on here. I’m just struggling to get to grips with what kind of a beast this is. Because it isn’t exactly fiction, is it? Or at least, if I came to it expecting what I normally expect from fiction I’d soon be pretty confused.

The first few paragraphs are dense to the point of being abstract. I can’t even make sense of some of the sentences (‘Simulated self-imposed delusions of grandeur in the intended cluster signified the continued expansion of stipulations further afield’ being a case in point). If your intention is to create the tower as a metaphorical image then I’m not sure it’s working, at least not for me, because I can’t visualise it. It’s like a metaphor that’s being described wholly in terms of the thing you’re trying to compare rather than the thing you’re comparing it to. For me, that results in neither one thing nor the other – clarity neither in the underlying philosophical argument nor in the image you’re building on top of it. But maybe that’s just me.

After a while I skipped on a bit further down, to where Clover entered the scene and there seemed to be more to get a handle on. But I still couldn’t fathom it out. The characters are unpleasant, while the action continues to be broken up with philosophical musings that I find hard to follow – so I have no desire to read on either to find out what happens to the people or to find out where your argument is leading.

Overall I’m sure what you’ve got here is very clever, but I can only be honest and say that I didn’t enjoy reading it, not even as an intellectual exercise. I just struggled with it too much. I’m honestly sorry – but I have no doubt your work has its own audience. That audience just isn’t me :-)

There hardly seems much point in me trying to suggest amends/point out typos, because I get the impression that everything you’ve done here is done for a reason, even if at first glance it would seem incorrect. But for what it’s worth, the minor changes I’d suggest to the first few paragraphs are below.

– ‘The tower block flanked the northern edge of the common[;] situated in a neatly trimmed lawn, it soared majestically’
– miss-match –> mismatch
– ‘outwardly facing exteriors’ – surely an exterior is by definition outward-facing?
– full point missing from end of para 3
– first sentence of para 5 – I’d make your existing comma into a semicolon and bracket-comma ‘for example’
– last sentence of that para – ‘The symmetry [was] exposed bilaterally’?
– ‘as solid as a two-dimensional object’ – not sure what you’re getting at here, since trees and blades of grass are three-dimensional, unless perhaps you’re taking the dimensions to be space and time (which I’m hazarding could be the horizontal/vertical here, but I may have got that completely wrong)
– ‘situated in a neatly trimmed lawn’ –you said that in para 1.

As soon as I started reading I could tell this was something very different, so I went carefully so as not to miss anything. My first thought was that the style used in the descriptions of the building reminded of later Beckett, particularly ‘Imagine Dead Imagine’. That distinctive kind of narration, with phrases repeated, like recurring patterns in an abstract painting, had a pleasing effect and the hard work you’ve obviously put in evolving the style is a job well done.

It’s hard to take in the full intent of the work at a single reading; this is a many layered piece, heavyweight intellectual stuff, and I can’t pretend to have understood it all. But my overall impressions were most favourable. Lacing a narrative with maths, physics and metaphysics in that way is an ambitious high wire act, and you pull it off superbly. Happy to lend my support.

Wow, very cleverly written and thought provoking stuff. It's a little over my head as i am a simple being, i have put this on my WL as i am going to have to read it again. It feels like a puzzle that needs unlocking and that will take me time.
Well done and good luck with this.
Lindsey
Vortex

Daniel,

After months of having No Compatibility on my watch list, I finally dipped into it. You managed to impress and puzzle me in about equal measures. You have mastered philosophical-academic language in the service of sci-fi to the point of impenetrability. (This may just mean that I have lost the ability to read philosophical treatises -- if I ever had it). That said, you've really got something here. It doesn't quite act like a novel, which may have been your intent. Rather than being about a thing, it is that thing.

If you're revising, you might think about front-loading the promised comedy or some plot to keep the reader hopeful that there will be a payoff to all the effort of reading the densely reasoned philosophical bits.

No obvious nitpicks, but I did have a couple of questions in chapter 1:

The tower block is described as being "solid as a two-dimensional object." Were you being facetious, or did you mean three-dimensional?

. . . light that retracted off the windows . . . Did you mean refracted? Reflected? Retracted doesn't really make sense.

I'm backing this just on use of language, which needs to be encouraged! Good luck with this project.

Karen Eisenbrey
CRANE'S WAY
TIME SQUARED

No Compatibility is a masterpiece. The story is clear once the secrets are unearthed, and the thrill is cracking the transcript. I call it a transcript rather than a manuscript, because I feel I'm directly involved in its evolution. The story comes alive paraphrasing the past and present, but also future events. Telling a story that has't happened yet, but will happen, as sure as the sun will rise. Only the paradox could have that sort of knowledge. I say transcript, because the secrets are in the abstraction. Unlock the interlock destiny and fate are exposed. Its all great fun and i back to story completly.

Fantastic story with encryptions like world created Earth; Adam and Eve expelled from
Paradise. Exact specifications used upright crossbar existentialism. The story is a terrific read, truly mammoth, with great structuring. I see from other comments there is a slight confusion with regard the plot but I understand it completely once I could be bothered to crack the hidden words. No Compatibility is so enjoyable, such a great use of words. Why labour with fifty-thousand words and twelve chapters when a story can be told in less the half the number of words. The encryptions are great, a lovely idea and if I'd paid good hard-earned money for the effort, what value I would have got. I hope to God the work is published!
PUBLISHERS LOOK OUT FOR THIS MARVELLOUS ORIGINAL BRILLIANT FANTASTIC WORK
AGENTS TAKE NOTICE OF THIS BOOK IT MUST BE SUPPORTED

Hi,
Very first thing I noticed when I looked at the pitch is, 'it is intresting'. When I started reading it, I noticed that you really excelled in writing. Really very impressive work.
All the best.

S.Vinay kumar,
10 roses for love

Daniel

You certainly have a way with words, but I'm afraid it just doesn't flow, and as such, someone like me (no concentration whatsoever) will struggle to keep on going. I just find it a little stagnant, but i have the feeling you want it that way. Plus, i think it's too descriptive, and it slows the entire pace down to a stand still.

It's a shame, because the synopsis is really intriguing and i enjoy a good philosophical debate

I feel you have a real niche project here, but it is very good for the right person.

I am intrigued by it all, and i hope to be back for more. I fear, however, that i will never be able to fully grasp this particular book

JB

Forgive an old philosopher, but we should all have time off for thinking. Or time off, to think. It is hard to cross the roads safely when cogitating and the general wayward ponder I'll have to watch my step after a few chaps of this. Rated it. Thank you.

You have constructed a tower block of words that have imprisoned the story. A formidable book and a challenge to read.
Best of luck with it.

After the first eleven paragraphs of No Compatibility I know I'm in a stinky tower block and I'm with clover, but I have no idea what a tower block is and I definitely don't envision anything as detailed as what you described. Stated differently, I have virtually no idea what I've read here. I managed to grasp that Clover regrets once being so immature that he defaced the property. Your sentences are structurally sound and your vocabulary is more than adequate, but I simply don't understand what I'm reading here. I don't understand The Sound and the Fury either, so I'm probably just stupid. Good luck with this.

How totally wonderful you are, Daniel!! :) Thank you so very much for again backing my memoirs/testimony book :) May God richly bless you. :) Love, Susie :) p.s. I have gold ******-rated your book :) - hope you've ****** 'd mine, too. Every ****** -ing & backing more than 24 hours moves our books up authonomy's lists. :) I want to ask you if you could please keep my book on your bookshelf because, I'm #1 on the editor's desk & I don't want to lose traction & to remain in the top 5 to be chosen February 28. :) Please read my profile page: I had a mini-stroke Nov. 10 with slurred speech for an hour & numbness of tongue still & over 24 smaller ones where I couldn't speak since & I"d sure like to cross the finish line of the editor's desk after almost 1 year of trying on authonomy. :) Thank you from the bottom of my heart for helping me :) - I have lost 3 sisters to strokes & my last sister, Mary had 2 heart attacks this past year.

No Compatibility -
I'm really sorry to say that this is not really my cup of tea. Your synopsis needs a bit of work, it's a bit wordy, confusing, and gave me a bit of a sore head.
It's good, and you are a good writer, but this book did give me quite a big headachhe (it's all the long words that i don't understand - but i'm fifteen, everyone else probably knows what they mean), so this is just my opinion.
on my watchlist
abi

Hi Daniel, I read your first 4 chapters twice and am sure I have still missed many elipses and allusions. This is complex material dense with philosophical topics - and the glimmer of a story just born and struggling to stay alive. I do see Dominic Clover in my (emotional) mind's eye - or rather two of him. His first appearance is as a thug, by implication of the lower order, but that does not fit with the awkward argumentative undergraduate type at his next outing. Where does he go from here?

Who do you see as your target reader? Not the general man in the street, I would imagine. He will definitely want a strong storyline, however much philosophy you include. No Compatibility is neither overtly scholarly nor instructively scholastic, although Clover in his second guise might be attracted. To me much of your material deals less with Existentialism, which is based on Logic, and more on Surrealism, which uses sly inuendo and improbable juxtapositions to jerk us into new perspectives in our thinking. - Here I am thinking of how you contrast Clover's actions with the architectural descriptions, for example.

There is no doubt that you can write, but from time immemorial stories have been what have caught the imagination of listeners and taught the most complex messages while making them seem simple and acceptable. Without a good story, people tend to turn away, leaving them uninstructed as well as unentertained. Exposition alone is not enough.

Existentialist treatise featuring one Dominic Clover a foremost authority on thuggery and violence. This tale only really started for me when this character appeared. I like him a lot. The opening paragraphs seem too dense and are quite hard work. Although there are some clever metaphors it sounded to me as if an architect with a philosophical bent, was describing a building in the way one of these tv wine critics describes a complex red. I think if you are going to do philosophy you have to be clear and this was obscure at times. Augustine, Shakespeare and Proust all did it with perfect clarity. The most popular existentialist work of recent years was sung by Gloria Gaynor after all. "I am what I am, And what I am needs no excuses, I deal my own deck....' I would like to see more of Dominic in this and for any insights/ observations to come from him. There is a lot of dialogue but as you dont attribute the dialogue in ch2 other than stating it was between Daniel (good intent) and Richard (evil intent) I wasn't sure who was saying what and the dialogue in ch 4 is just as difficult to follow. Kierkegaard said that it was important for us all to find a truth which was true for each of us. I think that this is a very brave but experimental novel. If you want to help us uncover truth you will have to let Dominic and the people he encounters show us what that might be in a more readable and convincing manner.

Daniel -

Noncompatibility - Why begin when it all ends? A challenge here, only who will have the patience of Dominic Clover to keep their blindness in check? Most will shut their door and simulate a little peace-of-mind. You text needs concentration, can lead to contemplation, even meditation. It felt to me like searching for coins on a ground carpeted with wilted leaves. I much enjoyed the occasional glint ... the accumulated coins might buy me a ticket out of the maze :) Then again, I might focus on the composting leaves and the new shoots after a good winter’s sle ep. See, your book inspires poetry. I re-freshed my reading and caught up with rating this unique work. Pia (Course of Mirrors)

Hi. I know i'm a ittle (a lot...) late on my review and I apologize.

I have to admit, it was a bit difficult to follow (for me), especially the paragraphs before the introduction of Clover. It brought foward a lot of concepts (and vocabulary) that I had to really think about, go over and think about again, which is a good thing! I've learned and I always appreciate that. However, the plot just kept escaping me. Just when I thought I had it, it would slip away again. I'm afraid, for that reason I can't comment on much unfortunatly...what I can say is this is an amazing reflection of your knowledge. I'm sure there are those who will love having a book that can stir their intellect. From the pitch, it honestly sounds like an interesting story, i'm just afraid i'm not up to the level of understanding this book requires to finish the whole thing yet. But when I am, I'm sure to come back. *Neicy*

Daniel, I have at last got around to reading your story. I'm not quite sure what I think of it, its' a little over my head I'm afraid. I did of course understand Clover and what makes him tick...power, but I'm sure there are easier and quicker ways of putting this across. You also tend to repeat yourself but I'm not sure if this is intentional or not. I would have liked to get to know Clover and go with him on his journey but I'm not sure I could cope with the very convulted and complicated route. But I am sure there are many others who will find this to their taste. Good luck. Berseba.

Hi Daniel, thought I'd backed you already but an't find any comment. Husbands type of read and he enjoyed it, so backed with pleasure.
Lizzie Scott :-)

Not one to read with a sore head this one is it? A bookseller friend of mine once said that she thought the best way to win a Booker Prize was to sling together a string of words of two syllables or more and see if they make sense. Her reasoning of course was that even if they didn’t, it wouldn’t matter because no-one would dare admit that they hadn’t a clue what the book was about. I might add that she was holding a copy of Brief History of Time in her hand and to the best of my knowledge that has never won a Booker.

So this is science and philosophy based and I don’t think I’m your target readership but I suspect you will have a readership that ‘gets this’ from the first line, it might be small but it will be erudite enough to give Clover a chance to prove that life is more than “nasty, brutish and short” and that subliminal space can exist within the walls of the symmetrical grid of a tower block.

Good luck with it. Joy Taylor

Hi Daniel, you offered a swap reads and since I've read the first chapter, I shall comment. I like sci-fi sometimes if it really is compelling. Now in your book, I've noticed that you've put a long narration about science or the atoms which is very informative but somehow tedious for some readers. I like chemistry so much and I guess that I could learn more about it if I read your book. Best regards!

"Inside the glistening mirror"
~ Chesire

HI Daniel ...

Finally found the time to catch up on my reading, problems with the internet and such. Now to your book. I like what I have read so far. It is deep and convoluted. I am not sure what your target audience is, but I am sure it will be limited. There is absolutely nothing wrong with your writing or your thinking, but the problem is that horrible word 'profit'.

As I have commented to another author, publishers want fast selling books and at the moment the standard of reading has fallen so much that footballers and celebrities are the top selling authors these days.

Sorry for being so negative on your great novel and, sad but true, commercialism rules these days. I wish you all the best in your quest. Backed with pleasure. Regards ... Duncan.

In my own personal opinion, you're trying very hard to make this book sound "smart." I see where you're coming from, but the first few paragraphs made me want to quit reading. Not only do you sound like you've swallowed a thesaurus, but you use such words (paradox, disparity, simulated) multiple times without rest. I realize that you want your work to be "enlightened" (or whichever adjective you choose to use), but just as Aaron Copeland did for music in the 1940s, you have to make it complex while still making it accessible. Try starting off slower so that your audience can get used to your style, or consider making the language a little less textbook-y.

Sarah "Choosing Love"

This is certainly no holiday read! However, I intend to take some time and read this properly, as I feel it deserves. Happily backed. Ceeds