Category Archives: Book Reviews

From grinding to ground: the book review tweaking is done

The PolyBlog
June 14 2025

So, I’ve added seven data fields to 273 book reviews, eliminated approximately 30 pages of manually maintained lists, and added several pages that compile all my book reviews into a series of indices. It was quite the grind.

As I mentioned earlier, many of the early book reviews had remnants from previous attempts to establish a common look and feel. Back in the Stone Age, I had tried using pre-established plugins that developers had created. I eventually removed them; they were designed to leave some of the information behind in case I wanted to reinstall the plugin later or just have the pages continue to look fine. I didn’t want the remnants; I didn’t need them, but well, that’s what I had. In a few old book reviews, that meant 100s of old data fields, slowing things down. On average, the first 150 or so had about 50-75 remnants, I think. Far too many to remove manually. Now THAT would have been a grind.

Instead, I found some tools to batch remove extraneous content, leaving me with about 20 fields per post, but at least they were easy to work with one by one. I thought I would do about 10 BRs per day, and thus it would take me about a month to cover 273 old posts. I was doing them a bit faster after #150 or so, partly because the steps weren’t all the same:

  1. Open the post
  2. Delete 20 old fields
  3. Add 7 new fields
  4. Enter the data for the 7 new fields
  5. If it was a new sub-category, go to the “series” page and create a new category AND create a shortcode for a subcategory “list” within that page.

The farther and farther I got into the updates, step 5 became less and less relevant — most of the categories were already established. In which case, I could update the data and press save before moving on.

When I reached 200 BRs, a minor miracle occurred…I had redesigned the reviews at that time and created a fresh review format. Since it never had any of the old remnants in it, the BRs from 200-273 had NO old fields to remove. I could just add 7 new ones, save the data, and move on.

Initially, it took me about an hour to update the code for approximately 10 reviews. Maybe 50 minutes or so. Not very speedily, hence the month estimate. However, when I reached about #100, I could manage about 15 in an hour. By #150, I could do almost 20. When I hit #200? I did the last 75 in one go, only two hours in total. My planned month-long project was completed in just over a week, with approximately 12 hours of work. Maybe a bit more. Definitely more than I wanted, but it is a much better approach than doing everything manually. I suspect I saved myself perhaps 5-7 hours worth of maintenance per year, so call it approximately a 6-hour incremental investment. I suspected I would have some data entry issues. How could I not, since I was designing on the fly? But I would have ways to verify things at the end.

If I review my original approach, which was to prioritize completion over perfection, I was going to delete a bunch of content, reduce my ongoing maintenance work, and functionality. Instead, I streamlined some backend things, which gave me a bit of room to spend some extra time under the hood now and add some bells and whistles. Let’s look at the result.

Results

I mentioned previously that I now have a very detailed set of pages that essentially do what the old lists did, but they are now automatically updated. Once the data is posted? It automatically adds the review to the various lists. Reviews are broken down by:

I thought I would reduce it to just the first two options above, but I managed to find some other tools that expanded the project beyond barebones, offering a lot more functionality with a smaller footprint. Not fully optimized, but still quite impressive for a revision.

Now, I have to admit, I am anal retentive, and I wanted to do a bit of data integrity checking on the list. For most of the main lists of “all posts”, those are relatively impossible to get wrong — they are generated by WordPress itself using most of its base functions.

The only real issue was, if everything was listed in a full list, would it show up WHERE it should in the sub-lists? The full archival text and by date of review were super easy and completely correct. The book review number had a glitch with one post, which turned out to be that the data I put in that field was for another field. Easy tweak, list went to normal. The ones by title, author and rating went fine from the word go, while the one by the year of publication had another glitchy entry that was easily corrected.

For the fiction and non-fiction lists, with all the sub-lists, the posts should show up exactly twice — once in either the fiction or non-fiction list and then once in one of the sub-lists for that genre, and grouped by series under the sub-headings.

But — spoiler alert — I apparently suck at data entry. I was expecting maybe a 2 or 3% error rate, but almost 10% of the posts had SOME sort of coding issue. The biggest glitch were about 8 non-fiction posts where I had simply defaulted to “fiction” because almost all the posts are fiction. I remembered on one post late last night that I hadn’t been paying attention to that field much in a few previous ones, although I wasn’t sure if that meant I coded them as fiction or I just mindlessly put in non-fiction correctly without remembering. It turns out that, yeah, I was mindless all right, just not correctly mindless. Easily fixed.

I also created a few categories and sub-categories that changed a bit over time. There were a couple of posts in non-fiction where I gave it a sub-category that would apply to that book, and probably no other in the whole collection. So why was I creating a sub-category for it as a series or genre? No idea. Again, easily fixed, but that was more about having designed on the fly without knowing the full data set. Once I saw the full data set, it was easy to correct. Originally, I thought “magic” would go into fantasy, but then I have some that are more paranormal in nature than fantasy. So I modified the paranormal grouping so that magic is clearly there (IF it isn’t fantasy with magic, that is). I also decided to set up some of my larger collections of readings (Nancy Drew, Sherlock Holmes and the Three Investigators) knowing they probably deserve a sub-grouping all on their own, given the size of the series. Oh, and haha, I realized that for Stephanie Plum where there are 20+ books, I wasn’t seeing them all…huh? Oh, right, the default is to show you just the first TEN in a series, not all of them. Oops, I need the whole list. But I would say third on the long list of little tweaking was that I coded something wrong…a few were simple typos like “ficton” instead of “fiction”, or I put RASC even though the code for the other RASC headings were “rascastronomy”. Another was a spelling mistake.

But the process was interesting. Looking at the list and cross-referencing everything was a pain in the patootie today, and sure, I could have waved it away as being anal-retentive. But the reality is that if I didn’t find those errors NOW, I would NEVER find them when there are 500 reviews or more. I am still not 100% sure I have everything grouped in the right order and sub-groupings, but unlike my previous manual lists, if I decide to reorder something, I can do it in about 60 seconds. I’m pretty happy with the new functionality and approach.

And did I mention that the grinding is done? 🙂 Even if I still have over 300 reviews in my book system to write and will be lucky to get even a quarter off the pile before the end of the year. I’m wondering though if there are any lessons learned for my other collections of reviews (music, TV, movies, recipes, etc.). None of them are anywhere near as elaborate yet, but when I designed them, I built off the book review infrastructure and approach. Maybe later this year, I’ll figure out if I should be coding it that way. I’m also wondering if my index for photo galleries should be auto-generated instead of manually maintained.

The Quick Red Fox by John D. MacDonald (1964) – BR00271 (R2025) – 🐸⚪⚪⚪⚪

The PolyBlog
June 8 2025

Plot or Premise

A famous movie star is being blackmailed with dirty pictures and she wants Travis to help get them back.

What I Liked

There isn’t much to like in this outing, except that Travis McGee is assigned a Girl Friday who helps him along with the investigation, so it’s not just him.

What I Didn’t Like

The blackmail scheme is pretty similar to part of the plot in Nightmare in Pink, and not once does McGee make a nod or a wink to having done this before. It’s almost as if the author took the subplot from Book 2 and turned it into a full-fledged plot for Book 4, all published in the same year. It’s very repetitive.

The Girl Friday is his love interest for the story, and reads like a repressed-woman-finally-finds-a-real-man romance fantasy written by a man. It has a few twists and turns, but the character isn’t very well-developed, despite a fantastic backstory.

Finally, there are hints in the story that a new psychopath is involved, who is very puritanical, and this leads nowhere, along with some other twists that read like a bad action film script.

And spoiler alert, there is a warning right at the beginning that plays out at the end, with McGee getting screwed, and yet all McGee has to say “boo” and the whole thing would fall apart. Instead, he goes off mad that he got screwed.

It makes no sense.

The Bottom Line

The quick red fox jumped into a lazy plot

Making progress on the Book Review update

The PolyBlog
June 3 2025

I played and tested. Played and tested. Played and tested. Then I made some decisions, followed by more playing and testing.

In the end, I realized that the overly manual way I was doing things before was biasing me away from doing anything now. And such was the bias, I was falsely interpreting it as it preventing me from finishing, aka the new standard for seeing whether I keep doing something as part of a larger project. I finally decided to add 7 variables as custom fields.

But first, an unrelated but annoying problem

To avoid going into too much technical detail, I have a problem with my website regarding memory load. I am running a slightly higher-quality personal site option, but I’m not running anything that is commercial quality. And that means that I often find myself hovering between 25 and 40 workable plugins. Right now, I have 31 which starts to slow things down on the admin / back-end when I’m editing.

The new approach has me putting in seven custom fields. What I wasn’t expecting was to get into my second book review and find there were already about a hundred OTHER variables/fields already there, many with redundancies and duplicate entries, and virtually none of it useful. Some of it was remnants from the two moves of BRs from site to sites. Other remnants were from previously used plugins that I tested at various points; they added custom data, and when I deleted the plugins, they left data behind. Some of that was accidental and poor design; others were intentional so that the data would still show properly even without the old plugin running. Except that I had later deleted that part of the post, so it wasn’t needed any longer. A couple were Review plugins, others were social media link managers.

I am anal-retentive, so of course I thought I would simply delete the other fields. Except there’s no easy way to mark them and delete a bunch; you have to delete them one by one. No problem. Click. Wait for refresh. Click. Wait for refresh. Click. Wait for refresh. Each time was taking maybe 5-7 seconds each. Times 100 remnant fields, and you start to see the boredom.

I went looking for a plugin to help me manage it all, but most were just replacements, not ones that would manage the existing fields. You can do it through manual editing of the databases, but I try not to mess with the database directly. I found nothing useful. Sooooo, I gave up. I went along my merry little way, decided I didn’t care about the huge list of fields, and just added my new ones.

Except adding each one also took 5-7 seconds to add and refresh. Sigh. The first BR had NO remnants, but 2 through 10 did. Between testing and playing, some editing, giving up and just adding, it took me almost 2 hours to do the first 10.

Then I was doing something else, and some wording popped into my head. I didn’t want to bulk edit custom fields, I wanted to bulk DELETE custom fields. A bit of googling around WordPress options later, and bam, I found a plugin called WP Bulk Delete. When you first run it, it looks really scary as there are a whole bunch of tabs to let you mass delete pages, posts, etc. I definitely did NOT want to do that!

However, on the first page, it provided options to run a “cleanup” on the website’s fields across all pages and posts. It would delete a lot of unused fields, particularly duplicates (yay!), and a few other things. I made a backup and ran the cleaner. A large number of extra entries were killed. I went back into the first 10 BRs again, and voila, almost all of the old data was gone. My new data was still there, along with about 15-25 other items. Generally, five are tied to some formatting, another five for old social media links, and then another 10+ related to an old review plugin. Except now, when I click on those to delete? It deletes it and refreshes in under a second. Totally manageable.

I’m back in business, with a much cleaner digital workspace.

Which fields did I create?

I can already sort on publication date / date of the review. All of the posts are already set to the review date, even some old ones. For example, I have some reviews that I wrote in 1998, but I never got around to putting them online until 2010 or so. When I published them, I set the date of the post all the way back to 1998 aka when I first wrote them.

Because of the messed up dates above, only the recent posts show up in numerical order. I had published all of my archives by #200 or so, but up until then, some of the things I went back and posted had higher BR #s. For example, a post I wrote in 1998 that I didn’t post until 2010 could have had a BR # of 00067 — the BR Number is the order in which I posted them online. It is part of the title of each BR post, but I added a field so I could sort them in numerical order.

I mentioned in a previous post that I can already sort all the posts in alphabetical order, because all of the BRs start with the title. Except for a small niggly detail. A title like “A Purple Place For Dying” or “The Staked Goat” would show up in A or T respectively. To get around that, I added a field for title sort order. I said in my previous post that I wasn’t going to worry about that, but it turned out to be easy peasy, lemon squeezy. It takes less than 10s to add, so I went ahead and included it.

In a similar vein, the author’s name is buried in the title of the post, and can’t be accessed easily. Yet I might want to sort by author’s last name, so added a simple field. I made a small tweak to the info in the field though…if I have Jeremiah Healy as the author of say three books, I don’t just put healyjeremiah in the field — I tack on the year of the publication (1984, 1986, 1984, etc.) so that when I sort by last name, it will get to Jeremiah in the “Hs” for Healy AND list them in ascending chronological order.

One thing that I didn’t have on the website previously was any way to sort the better books aka those that I gave a 5/5 to, for example. I added a field for rating and it will now list all the ones from 5 stars down to 1 star.

The year of publication appears in the title, but I couldn’t sort on it before. In practice, it is more about seeing the oldest stuff that I’ve reviewed, or the newly published material.

I added a field for genre but I confess that I may have done that wrong for the setup. I initially only wanted to differentiate between Fiction and Non-Fiction. I have another “sort” that is a bit more genre-related, but I do that separately. I have two tabs, one for fiction (main) and a shorter tab for non-fiction. Perhaps I didn’t mess it up so much as misname it. I did it in part because I save my books digitally in two different libraries based on fiction or non-fiction, in fact, and I was mostly replicating that approach.

For genres, though, it is more often for me about series within a genre. For example, I created a field for Series but when I actually build the page for series, I have a whole bunch of sub-lists that are generated based on the name of the series. So far, the sub lists are:

  • Standalone
  • Action
    • Jack Reacher
  • Criminal
    • Easy Rawlins
    • Keller
  • Forensics
    • Dr. Temperance Brennan aka Bones
  • Lawyer
    • Nina Reilly
  • Police
    • Dutchman Historical Mysteries
    • Inspector Regal
  • Private Eye
    • John Cuddy
    • Jeri Howard
    • Philip Marlowe
    • Jennifer Marsh
    • Sunny Randall
  • Sleuth
    • Travis McGee
    • Barbara Simons
    • Hannah Trevor
  • Spy
    • Amelia Pearce
  • Thriller
    • Nelson Demille (not sure if I coded this correctly)
  • Paranormal
    • The Mediator
    • 1-800-Where-R-You / Missing
  • Star Trek
    • The Next Generation
    • Deep Space Nine
    • The New Frontier
    • Voyager

I’ve updated 40 or so book reviews to the new approach. Of the list, ten are ones that I COULD decide to expand and do something differently for genre. Decisions, decisions. It’s pretty easy to re-code ten if that’s what I want to do. And then all the various books would be separated by genre, even the non-fiction ones. Hmm…I’ll have to noodle on that one a bit more.

In the meantime, it all seems to work well so far. And with the majority of “extra” fields already cleaned up, it’s a much faster process now. Plus as I get more and more categories created, for the series/genre combo I mean, the faster the overall coding goes — if I code something new for Travis McGee for example, I don’t have to build the query into the list page; it’s already built and if I code a review as “travismcgee”, it auto-adds itself to that category.

Onward!

No, Paul, no…don’t change your Book Reviews!

The PolyBlog
June 2 2025

So, I have this thing. An old thing. I thought I killed it, now it’s back in a new form. And it’s insidious.

When I started my website, the biggest thing I intended to put on it was a set of my book reviews. I didn’t really know how many there would be, or how long it would take to write even one at a time, but it was what I saw as my main content. I had nothing else to blog about, I didn’t think.

I put a bunch on one site, changed the format of the site, re-did all the book reviews to match. Moved to a new site, had to fix and adjust all of them. This pattern continued on and off for a few years, and as long as the total number of reviews was less than 100, it was always “doable” to make a change and go back to edit all the previous ones. I did this maybe 5 or 6 times in total, not including small tweaks over time. I’m talking about a combination of both layout changes — the order of things, headings, etc. — as well as the content.

When I broke 100 reviews, I said, “That’s it. These are my reviews, this is the format, I am NEVER changing again.” Which was fine.

Then I had a huge site failure at one point, and I had to redo them all anyway (not in terms of re-writing them, I just had to manually post a bunch of them again). So around 200 reviews, when I was rebuilding, I said, “Okay, this is the ABSOLUTE last time” and that’s where it has stood since before the pandemic. I’m up to about 270 now with another 120 in backlog or so.

And I like the format of my book reviews, I do. I start with Plot or Premise (depending on fiction or non-fiction), write about What I Liked, then on to What I Didn’t Like (although for some books, I combine the two together), add in a disclosure section if I got the book for free or have met the author somehow, and then finish off with a “Bottom Line”. I went through almost 15 years of versions and wrestling with my muse about what I wanted to say in a Book Review, what was fair game and what wasn’t, etc. to get to this point.

I write the review, post it to Amazon Canada (used to share to Amazon US too), Chapters Indigo, my public library, Goodreads (used to do LibraryThing separately), and I publish on my own website. At one point, I also used to include Google Books, but I got out of that after a while. Since the first 200 or so were done, I narrowed it down to Amazon, Chapters, GoodReads, the OPL and my website.

I confess that I had hoped that my book reviews would spark commentary. That people would read them on various locations on the web, and comment…tell me they agreed, tell me they disagreed, etc.

That never happened. Heck, just like the rest of my blog, I rarely know if ANYONE is even reading my posts. It’s like the proverbial joke that writing on the bathroom wall would attract more eyeballs.

But I digress.

So, what’s new, pussycat?

No, not the Tom Jones song. What’s new is oddly enough NOT about the book reviews. It is about something related, which is my To Be Read (TBR) pile.

Way back when I was a young teenager, I started a two-page list of the main authors I was collecting, along with the list of books I needed. However, I didn’t always have complete lists, so if I knew about four books and bought two of them, I couldn’t simply add the remaining two to the list — there could be another ten that I didn’t know about. So, if I went into a store and saw a title that wasn’t on my list, I couldn’t be sure if I had it already or if it was “new” to me. This meant I ended up with a longer to-do list — all the books by author X or in series Y, with marks indicating whether I already owned them. Think of it like having a list of all the Agatha Christie books I could learn about (without having the internet yet), and printing it out on an 8.5×11″ double-sided sheet of paper, with at least three columns, and book titles down to about 8 or even 6 point font.

It had everything on it — what I had read, what I owned but hadn’t yet read, and what I hadn’t found yet. A collector’s list, if you will. Like Pokémon, you gotta get ’em all.

Around 1994 or so, I updated my list and then ignored it for about 10 years at least. Somewhere in the mid-2000s, I got the idea to recreate the list in new form! Except it is way out of control. Take even something like Star Trek novels. There are literally hundreds out there now in multiple sub-series. I don’t have time to track them all, let alone read them all. Or Perry Mason, with 75 books or so. Or the giant expanded Sherlock Holmes universe … it’s actually a research genre for academia, you can become a professor of Holmes’ materials, covering not only the original Holmes’ stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle but also other stories involving Holmes, expanded stories involving characters from the Holmes’ books (like Irene Adler), or adding characters like Enola Holmes, a younger sister never mentioned.

I had a dream that when I eventually reviewed all my books, catching up on years of backlogs, I would also have my complete “wishlist” of all the series I wanted to complete. And I wanted it online, cuz I’m anal retentive. I have my own list in OneNote. Incomplete, of course, just as it was on the website.

But the indexing on the website has been holding me back. I recently wrote about a fascinating YouTube video and how it might help me adapt my approaches to certain projects.

Did I just find a life-altering paradigm from a random YouTube video?

And so I wanted to see what would happen if I applied it to my indexing of books in my website. The optimal solution would be, of course, that I would list all the authors I track, compile all the books that they have ever published but narrowed to those that I want to read, and publish the list. Easy peasy right? And then as I read them, I could mark them off.

Another optimal solution would be to take all of that info, throw it into a database, and publish the database in my website, allowing queries. Same research requirement, extra webbing.

A sub-optimal and my current practical solution has been to take the info for a given author, say John D. MacDonald who wrote the Travis McGee novels, upload the names of the 20+ books in the McGee series, and then paste links to the reviews as I write them. Sounds easy, right? Except that ended up being really painful. I was putting the info in one of 27 different pages, one for each letter of the alphabet and one for titles that started with numbers, creating a heading for John A. MacDonald, another sub-heading for Travis McGee, and then the titles of the 20+ books. Just to get to the place where I can link the FIRST review. But it was the only way I could see to put that full list online.

But when I reviewed it from the project management ideal of “what is the actual project”, the reality is that my goal has never really been nor should it have been to have my entire collection list online. Nobody cares about it except me. And I already have it in OneNote where I can see it easily. I thought I was making these lists as an easy way to show “hey, here are 20 books about Travis McGee” and the links to my review, which is cool, I admit. But it’s not “easy”, it was actually really time-consuming.

The REAL project is simply to get my book reviews online with a little bit of sorting capability. Was this helping me do this? Nope. I was acting like a card-carrying librarian, trying to create my own card catalogue system for every book I ever wanted to read or had read. So I wasn’t making progress. Yet I had 270+ entries across multiple pages and I couldn’t really see how to convert it into something better than an alphabetical list by title.

Oh, yeah, I can display posts by other variables

I thought I had a solution at one point for structured data of any type. I had a table plugin that was basically a front-end table maker and a back-end flat-file database manager. The benefit was that I could create a table say with the following columns:

  • Book review #
  • Title of book
  • Author’s name
  • Date of review
  • Date of publication
  • Rating

Maybe a dozen or so “fields”. And once it was in the table, yowza. I could sort on ANY column. Great, right? Well, sure, but it meant I had to put a lot of data in the back-end into fields. You COULD upload from a spreadsheet, which I did, but when I moved from a spreadsheet to something more functional and readable in OneNote, it was painful to enter or update. Way too much work, and the pages could be slow to load.

So I decided to ditch all the manual pages I had created. I could generate a list of all the book review posts by title, or date, and that seemed like probably good enough. I have a very structured title structure for every book review:

Title by Firstname Lastname (year of publication) — BRbook review # (Ryear of review) — rating

So for a previous review I did, the title of the post is:

Infection by John Gregory Betancourt (1999) – BR00004 (R2001) – 🐸🐸🐸⚪⚪

It gives all the info I want at a quick glance, really easy for me to find stuff without having to go into the post if I’m looking for something while out and about. More reference for me than anything.

The downside is that I can ONLY sort on the title OR the date. I can’t sort by author name, year of publication, year of review or rating. The previous index pages were letting me sort by author name, but as I said, it was a lot of work to maintain those other 27 pages with all the extra info. Not just the pages of reviews that have been written, but the to do list of future books to read and review.

As I noted above, I said to myself, “Okay, let’s kill those pages and just go with the title or date sort.”

Except…

There might be another way to tweak my approach, get rid of the big work, add a bit more work back in, and let me sort on other things.

I can define some meta values per post

The WordPress system will let me define my own variables for posts, which because I already have a plugin that will sort on various fields, I can then sort on those fields.

I gave it a go the other night, and I took my first three book reviews. I created a new field called BR_number and I put in my five-digit BR number. I assume I’ll never make it past 10K, let alone 100K, but I’m good to 99999. I added another field called BR_name and for the first review, I put in the variable “davidpeter”. This is for Peter David, the author of the first book. This will let me sort on that field, which is last name first. I don’t have a way to access the main post and run concatenation to generate it all, but it’s good enough and short enough to do manually. I’m debating if I want to say “davidpeter1999” so the books by each author will come out in chron order, but haven’t decided yet.

I started to consider if I want to add in fields for ratings, year of publication, year of review, fiction/non-fiction, standalone or series, hardcover/paperback/ebook, and where I had published the reviews, but well, again, NOBODY cares about those features other than me, and I already have them coded on my OneNote pages. Optimal me would say YES, we should have ALL THE DATA, and even want to figure out ways to export / import from my Calibre ebook library would I would also have library categories, tags, ratings, all the other meta data I mentioned, # of pages, # of words, estimated grade level, and formats.

Let’s file that under #SquirrelMode.

I want to go with Name and Number, series is too much trouble. I’m on the fence for rating. But date is easy and obvious. I have one wrinkle to figure out. If I sort by title, all of the posts have the full alphabetical title…which is a fancy way of saying it says “The ….” and “A….” which the computer cannot ignore. If I want to fix that sort, I would have to add a field with a “sortable” book title. Love the premise, hate the amount of work to do it.

It’s all about the back work, not the forward work

If I do this, I want all 270+ reviews to show up in the various sort lists. Not just the ones from here onward. So if I do this, I would need to go back and recode all 273 books to date.

Coding forward is easy; coding backward is annoying. And, as I said, 270+ reviews to add metadata to, so that the future indexing works. Plus all future reviews, even if relatively straightforward.

As a digression, I created a test sort on the first three titles the other night, worked almost right, but I found I was getting something really weird as a result. The sort order wasn’t working the way I thought it should. It was inverted. No biggie, I switched it around, all good. Then I added another title, and nope, it didn’t sort right. I looked at examples, not figuring it out.

I finally emailed the plugin created and said, “I’m sorry to bother you but what am I missing…”. And it turned out to be a simple reference problem, some misleading nomenclature, and general ignorance on my part. It basically said something like “sort on variable” so I put in “sort on BR_name”. Except it literally meant to write the word variable, not the name of the variable. Oops. Not to mention: doh!

Way less work than it was, much greater functionality going forward, and it even looks better in the end. I just have to redo 270 reviews that I said I would NEVER CHANGE AGAIN. Sigh. Don’t even get me started on the fact that I should probably consider doing it for ALL my other reviews too (music, movies, TV seasons, recipes)…at least if I do it for those? It’s only about 50 in total. Not much work at all, in comparison.

Mostly, I’m wrestling with the Project Management question. Adding the extra variables doesn’t help me finish. It adds some functionality without reducing too much. And it’s a manageable albeit boring bit of work.

Sigh. Okay, I’ll do it. I’ll add the functionality to the BRs. But I am NOT going to put in a field to avoid sorting on “The” or “A” as part of the title. That’s a step too far.

The Eye of the World by Robert Jordan (1990) – BR00273 (R2025) – 🐸🐸🐸🐸⚪

The PolyBlog
May 27 2025

Plot or Premise

The Wheel of Time turns, and the battle between the Dragon of Light and the Lord of the Dark occurs over and over, with destiny weaving people’s fates or people’s actions nudging destiny. Three young men from a distant village are attacked by beasts of the Dark and are pursued across the countryside, aided by an advanced witch, a soldier, two novice witches, and various travellers that they meet along the way.

What I Liked and Didn’t Like

The story is epic, with a wide breadth of story and a lot happening across the pages. As the first of 14 stories, even the first one is amazing in its piece of the overall storyline. The steady young shepherd, Rand; the quiet young blacksmith, Perrin; and the mischievous farmer, Mat, are targeted by the Dark Lord for reasons none of them understand. The forces at play, the history of the battle…it all seems like simple legends and stories to their quiet area of the world. Until Trollocs and Shadowmen attack their homes and start chasing them across the countryside.

I love the main characters and most of their story (Mat is affected by some dark forces that get a bit monotonous over time). Spoiler alert, but it turns out Perrin can communicate with wolves, which is startling and disturbing news to him. Egwene and Nynaeve, two young women from the same small village, turn out to be potential powerful witches. And a powerful witch, Moiraine, plus her protector, Lan, are all great characters. Any one of them could be a story in and of itself, but the pattern weaves them together. I also like that the first book is relatively complete at the end…while there is a continuing storyline, the first part is “done” and thus self-contained.

There are two things I don’t like about the book, and the first is a bit pedantic. Or pedestrian. There is some seriously bad editing in the book. I can accept some things being repeated a few too many times…if it’s an important plot point, you don’t want anyone to miss it. It’s a little heavy-handed in some places, but well, okay. However, there is a point where Mat and Rand are on a long road, lasting about 10d perhaps in total. Maybe two weeks, it’s hard to tell. Anyway, as they are on one stretch, it is really dusty. But there is a reference to how it’s okay because they have neck scarves that a local farmer and his wife gave them, which used to belong to their sons. No biggie. Except fast forward about six chapters, they’re almost at the end of the road, nearing the big city, and another farmer gives them two scarves that used to belong to his son. It’s the live version of the scene that they already told us about six chapters / days earlier. Huh? Are we supposed to believe it happened identically twice? Or did they somehow time-travel and not tell us? Just bad editing. That shouldn’t happen in a majorly commercial book with multiple printings.

The second problem is much bigger and endemic to the series. There are way too many characters. Note that I read book one, then watched three seasons of the TV show, started book 2, and I had almost no idea who was who. I’m usually pretty good at keeping track of characters, even with similar names, and I had actual faces from the TV series to help me remember who was who. Nope. I got 3 chapters in and was almost completely confused. Partly because I realized that with OVER 250 CHARACTERS in book one, I didn’t really know who everyone was going into book two. FYI, some of the books in the series have over 600 referenced characters. Now, sure, many of them are simply names thrown out as part of historical references. I finally had to go online, find a list of ALL the characters in book 1 and create my own cheat sheet. The laundry lists at the end of the books were just not cutting it.

Here’s my cheat sheet for Book 1 of 14, with only about 35 (!) particularly relevant to the outcome.

The Bottom Line

Epic storyline, too many characters