Comments on: Graph… of DOOM http://www.parenthetical.net/2010/03/07/graph-of-doom/ Book reviews, snark, and adventures in locovoration Mon, 30 Aug 2010 14:48:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Old-School Apocalypse April! http://www.parenthetical.net/2010/03/07/graph-of-doom/comment-page-1/#comment-53858 Old-School Apocalypse April! Thu, 01 Apr 2010 13:35:58 +0000 http://www.parenthetical.net/?p=975#comment-53858 [...] month I wrote a lot about apocalypses and dystopias, a perennial favorite topic here in Parenthetical-land. Those posts, and Presenting [...] [...] month I wrote a lot about apocalypses and dystopias, a perennial favorite topic here in Parenthetical-land. Those posts, and Presenting [...]

]]> By: Greg http://www.parenthetical.net/2010/03/07/graph-of-doom/comment-page-1/#comment-53817 Greg Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:30:11 +0000 http://www.parenthetical.net/?p=975#comment-53817 She seems to be claiming that unexplained disasters are on the rise, but I don't really see how that's borne out by the graph. She seems to be claiming that unexplained disasters are on the rise, but I don’t really see how that’s borne out by the graph.

]]> By: Lenore http://www.parenthetical.net/2010/03/07/graph-of-doom/comment-page-1/#comment-53803 Lenore Mon, 08 Mar 2010 20:40:45 +0000 http://www.parenthetical.net/?p=975#comment-53803 How fun! And looking forward to April. I read the Left Behind series, but never thought of them as being part of the genre, hmmm. How fun! And looking forward to April.

I read the Left Behind series, but never thought of them as being part of the genre, hmmm.

]]> By: Lance http://www.parenthetical.net/2010/03/07/graph-of-doom/comment-page-1/#comment-53800 Lance Mon, 08 Mar 2010 08:28:35 +0000 http://www.parenthetical.net/?p=975#comment-53800 That's a really lovely chart...though I think it feels a little bit weirdly misleading to do it in terms of percentages rather than raw numbers, because I can't help the feeling that the 75/25 split in '36 to '44 means that there were about four books a year, and that number increased after '44. (It's also weirdly constant during that eight-year span.) Neat nevertheless. That’s a really lovely chart…though I think it feels a little bit weirdly misleading to do it in terms of percentages rather than raw numbers, because I can’t help the feeling that the 75/25 split in ‘36 to ‘44 means that there were about four books a year, and that number increased after ‘44. (It’s also weirdly constant during that eight-year span.) Neat nevertheless.

]]>