In other news...well, some of my friends are upset with other of my friends, and vice versa. It makes me stressed, but I'm trying to not think about it too much, because I'm pretty sure it's not actually my business. (There is some question of whether it actually is my business, but I'm pretty sure not.) But whether it's my business or not, it's sad to see my friends sad. Not a good day.
And on an only very tangentially-related topic, I was thinking about some of this book discussion that's been going on, and the question of what makes a good book. Should a book be first competent across the board, and then hopefully better than competent in some things? Is that a minimum requirement for a good book? I don't think so -- I think it's a minimum requirement for a mediocre but competent book, of which there are sadly far too many. If given a choice between such a book and another book which does almost everything sub-competently, even badly, but does one particular thing brilliantly -- I'll choose the second book every time. Because the first has nothing interesting to say to me. I'll slog through a lot of muck to find one shining gem -- as evidenced by my continued interest in working as an editor. :-)