My enthusiasm over this crime drama has substantially dimmed, due to the fact that it is a torturous chore to read. You can all probably tell this is true because the review of it is still not up yet (goal set: finish that before August, or so help me I will be very disappointed in myself and probably self-medicated with dairy products). It has gotten to the point where every day I read a chapter, fall down on my desk in operatically dramatic despair, and then have a fight with John as he tries to confiscate the book and burn it so he doesn't have to continually watch me reenact Isolde's death scene over a piece of literature.

While I will be finishing it despite these trials, I've had some interesting discussions with my erstwhile partner in Phantom readings, and he's of the opinion that if something is making it so hard to read that I'm literally grinding to a halt on the Project, I should probably stop and move on to something else. While this idea has some merit - not reading and writing < reading and writing - it also feels unfair: how can I properly review something without reading all of it? What if there are serious plot changes, style shifts or clever denouements at the end that change the entire piece's impact or tone? It seems like not finishing a piece is always selling its possibilities short, even though nine times out of ten it's probably not going to improve at the last minute. But this is scholarship, so fairness is what I'm about. And goddammit, no book is going to beat me. I will KO this book if it thinks it wants some.