Category Archives: Books

That’s why it’s a sin to kill a mockingbird

So, the biggest news of the week, publishing-wise, is that Nelle Harper Lee, the beloved author of To Kill a Mockingbird, will have a new book coming out in mid-July. Go Set a Watchman is supposedly the book Lee submitted before submitting Mockingbird, and follows Scout as an adult, going back to the small town that shaped her. Cassie wrote a beautiful piece about the upcoming release, and asked that I write about my thoughts about the release, and I told her I was scattery (as I am!) but I’d been thinking about it a lot this week. I didn’t think I had it in me to write a whole post about it, but started writing…and here we are.

I’ve talked about this before (probably ad nauseum) but Mockingbird is, most sincerely, one of my favorite and most formative books. I think it’s the same for so many people. We want to be (and hope we are, deep down) Atticus; we identify with tough little scrappy Scout; our collective hearts break for Boo. Some of the most beautiful lines in literature come from the book…

“Atticus said to Jem one day, ‘I’d rather you shot at tin cans in the backyard, but I know you’ll go after birds. Shoot all the blue jays you want, if you can hit ‘em, but remember it’s a sin to kill a mockingbird.’ That was the only time I ever heard Atticus say it was a sin to do something, and I asked Miss Maudie about it. ‘Your father’s right,’ she said. ‘Mockingbirds don’t do one thing except make music for us to enjoy. They don’t eat up people’s gardens, don’t nest in corn cribs, they don’t do one thing but sing their hearts out for us. That’s why it’s a sin to kill a mockingbird.’”

“Miss Jean Louise, stand up. Your father’s passin’.” 

His lips parted into a timid smile, and our neighbor’s image blurred with my sudden tears.
“Hey, Boo,” I said.
“Mr. Arthur, honey,” said Atticus, gently correcting me. “Jean Louise, this is Mr. Arthur Radley. I believe he already knows you.”

“Atticus put his face in my hair and rubbed it. When he got up and walked across the porch into the shadows, his youthful step had returned. Before he went inside the house, he stopped in front of Boo Radley. ‘Thank you for my children, Arthur,’ he said.”

 And in looking for these online to get the wording exactly right, I teared up at the power of them. It’s been so long since I read the book for the first time – I don’t even remember the first time I met the Finches, honestly, whether it was in high school or early in college – and I’m still moved to tears by the simple beauty in Lee’s words.

I’ve read the book more times than I can count; I held off on watching the movie because I didn’t think it could possibly have the power of the book, but oh, was I wrong. Gregory Peck was Atticus Finch. His calm authority gave me chills. I saw a beautiful production of a theatrical version of it a couple of years ago which moved me to tears; the actor who played Atticus gave the most beautiful reading of “Thank you for my children, Arthur,” perfectly tear-choked and stiff-upper-lipped, and I audibly sobbed in the theater. (I wasn’t alone in that.)

All of this to say, when a friend posted that Go Set a Watchman was going to be published in July, my heart jumped. Of course it did. These characters have become my family over the years. A book showing me what happened to them? A book following Scout into adulthood, giving us a peek at Jem, seeing if they’ve kept in touch with Dill, letting us know if Atticus has kept his idealism with everyone around him trying to beat it out of him, letting us know if Mayella turned out alright? How can I not want that?

Then news started coming out that maybe, just maybe, this wasn’t what Lee wanted.

Short version: Everyone knows that Mockingbird was Lee’s only book. She’s been a bit of a recluse ever since – not Salinger-level, or anything, but not going around the world singing “I WROTE MOCKINGBIRD, WHOO-HOO, LOOK AT ME!” (And side note, there have been rumors for years that her dear friend Truman Capote actually wrote Mockingbird – because of course a woman couldn’t have written something that luminescent, and she never followed up on it, so WHAT IS SHE HIDING? And then there are other rumors that Lee wrote Capote’s In Cold Blood, so how about we just assume they each wrote their own books and let people have their successes as neither of them have, that I know of, ever accused the other of nefariousness?)

Her sister was her lawyer for years, until she recently passed away. Lee has had a stroke and, by most reports, isn’t of sound mind. Her sister was very protective of her, and it’s come up that it’s very suspicious that this long-lost manuscript has suddenly surfaced upon her death. People are saying she’d sign anything anyone put in front of her these days, and without her sister to look out for her, she just might have signed off on a book she never wanted published. It’s a savvy move from the publisher – the book was announced just a few days ago, and is currently #5 on Amazon’s pre-order list of Contemporary Fiction and#10 in the Kindle Store for Contemporary Fiction. And Mockingbird? #1 with a bullet, baby. Topping the list currently on Amazon in the Kindle Store for Literary Fiction, #1 in Literature and Fiction in the United States, and #1 in Legal Fiction. Take THAT, John Grisham! I’m not saying, if this is true, it’s not a completely slimy move…but financially, it’s savvy.

She's kind of adorable, right? I want her to be my neighbor. I want to hang out with her and talk about birds and crocheting and words, words, words.

She’s kind of adorable, right? I want her to be my neighbor. I want to hang out with her and talk about birds and crocheting and words, words, words.

So what’s a reader to do?

There’s no way I couldn’t read this book. I have to. Everyone’s going to be reading it. It’s going to be like when the last Harry Potter book was released and I couldn’t go three feet without seeing someone with that gigantic book in their hands because they didn’t want to go even minutes without reading it. This is going to be a global discussion when it comes out. A global discussion about a book? How can I not be part of that? And the sheer fact that more people are reading Mockingbird – how can I not love that? But I’m torn. What if Lee – this woman who introduced me to Atticus and Jem and Scout and Dill and Boo – didn’t want this book flying around in the wild? What if it’s not up to her standards and that’s why it hasn’t been released until now? Don’t I owe more to this woman who’s been such a force in my life, whose given me so much? None of us will ever really know what she wants, will we? Do we let the book speak for itself?

Yes. Of course I’ll read it. And I have the highest hopes that seeing all of my old friends again, these people that I consider family, will be everything that I hope it will be. I will talk to my most beloved readers about it and we will discuss and argue and fight over our favorite lines and characters and it will be glorious.

And I will hope in my heart of hearts that my beloved Nelle Harper Lee, even if she didn’t want the book released, will understand that I’m reading the book out of love. I’m being given another chance to see people I love. How can I say no to that?

It’s just that it feels a little like killing a mockingbird.


A new and most exciting venture!

This is just to say that you shouldn’t read me HERE today. You should go read me ELSEWHERE. (Well, read this here, too, I mean, you’re already here, and all.)

See, for the past month or so I’ve totally been working on this project which is LIVE TODAY! Well, “live” is relative. It’s live now, but there’s not a hell of a lot on it. There will be soon, though.

I have officially started my own book review blog; all of my reviews will be there from now on, as will random other literary-related things as they strike my fancy. Will they strike my fancy? No idea. Fancies are strange like that. You can’t predict a fancy!

I guess you can predict a Cat Fancy; they're bound to have cat-related articles in them, right? Right.

I guess you can predict a Cat Fancy; they’re bound to have cat-related articles in them, right? Right.

What does this mean for YOU, my loyal Lucy’s Footballians?

Well, really, very little. You can choose to read my writing over there as well, or, if you have no interest in reviews and literary things, you can keep reading here; I promise I’ll be posting in both places. (Speaking of which, I even made up a SCHEDULE for posting over here this month for myself. Like a grownup LADY. I know! Impressive, right? It’s hanging in my kitchen next to a magnet making fun of Dubya. What, isn’t that a thing everyone has in their kitchen? ANYWAY, I totally have posting ideas for like a DOZEN posts at LEAST over here this month, so go go gadget me. Some are even – GASP! – humorous!)

So, if you’d like to be ahead of the curve and see what a blog with ZERO CONTENT looks like, you can go here and check it out (and follow it! And tell your friends! And totally give me a ticker-damn-tape-parade! What? That’s way too much to ask? FINE) and in about an hour, the first post will go up, And about an hour after THAT, the SECOND post will go up. You can follow it and get notifications, or get email telling you when new posts are up, or watch my Twitter timeline or my blog Facebook page or or or…you know. All the usual things one does to find out if I’ve posted, I suppose.

I hope you love it; I’m very excited about it, and have all kinds of plans and schemes for things I want to write over there. Stay tuned, jellybeans.

Oh, and in Lucy’s Football news, since this IS Lucy’s Football, after all: um, things are…well, the same. I decorated for Christmas; I am getting packages in the mail so I can send people their Christmas packages in (hopefully) a timely manner (two of them arrived today that are so perfect for the person they’re for I totally squeed upon opening the box); work is going well; Dumbcat has not gotten any more intelligent and as we speak is twitching in his sleep so I think he’s dream-fighting cat-ninjas.

NINJA CAT!

NINJA CAT!

I hope Dumbcat wins.

Dad bought a laptop with a camera in it; after I convinced him that blacking it out with a Sharpie was a bad idea (you know, because THE GOVERNMENT), I may have convinced him that once he gets to Florida for the winter he and I can talk! WITH our FACES! I can’t even imagine the adventures that will happen if that occurs. (He’s totally going to Florida for months on end this winter, like the old people do. He doesn’t like to be called the old people but he’s not reading this so I suppose I’m safe.) I told him he can also make amateur porn and he said “daughters aren’t supposed to say ‘amateur porn’ to their fathers” and I said “yeah, probably not” and he said, “but that was a good one” and I said “yeah, I know, that’s why I said it.”

So all’s well here. Busy busy busy. Christmas is a’comin’ and I want it to be so special for people this year and that doesn’t just happen, you know! Plans need to be made!

That is all, I think. So, if you are so inclined, pop on over to new-blog-land and give it a look-see, or a follow, and I promise to tell you about books both good AND bad, and hopefully add books to your to-be-read lists, and have all the fun. Or, if nothing else, keep track of what I’ve read, because I totally brought a book home from the library the other day? And I’d already read it. TRUE STORY!

See you soon. Elsewhere, perhaps!

This is totally going to be me to all the people over there. New or not. I'm just that excited. And now I want to watch "Up" again.

This is totally going to be me to all the people over there. New or not. I’m just that excited. And now I want to watch “Up” again.


And Indeed There Will Be Time (Guest Post Goodness!)

I know, I’ve been neglecting you all terribly. Sorry; lots going on. I’ll try to catch you up this weekend, if I can get in the right headspace to do so.

In the meantime, I DID blog today; just elsewhere. Over at Tipsy Lit, I have a guest post up about reading and time and memories and all good things. With a photo of MOI. Sort of. So go check it out. You’ll like it, I think. (And yay for guest posting! I always feel so damn fancy. I hope I remembered my etiquette, like which fork to use, and to put my napkin in my lap.)

Have lovely weekends; do some late-autumny things. It’s supposed to be in the low 60s here. The low 60s! In NOVEMBER! I think Mother Nature is experiencing some sort of mental illness this year. This autumn has been weirdotimes.

Go read me being me elsewhere. *smooch* Love your faces.

And Indeed There Will Be Time.


Goodreads; Badcensorship.

Some of you may know that as well as blogging about whatever the hell tickles my fancy over here, I also review books. Yes! It is true! To hell with you, all the kids that mocked me for reading too much in school; I’ve made a nice little lucrative (in a non-paying sense) career out of it on my beloved interwebs! I have two places that allow me to spew my book-related thoughts whenever I feel the need; Insatiable Booksluts and Snobbery. It’s the perfect gig for me; no deadlines, I get to read what I want, and I get to tell people about amazing (or, at times, NOT-amazing) books that I come across (and there’s nothing happier for a reader than when you recommend a book to the faceless masses and someone takes your recommendation, reads the book, and loves it as much as you do. It’s an amazing feeling.)

However, there are some books that I read that, for whatever reason, don’t make it to either site, Either I didn’t like them well enough to write a full review of them, or they just don’t fit either site. For those books, I write a quick review at Goodreads.

Goodreads is perfect for me; I can keep track of what I’m reading, I can socialize with other readers, and I can write quick reviews of books that don’t deserve the full-review treatment. This is as much for me as for everyone else. I read a lot, and I like to keep track of what I read. I used to have a spreadsheet, but I lost track of that when it got insanely long. I like the graphic aspect of Goodreads, as well – sometimes I don’t remember the title of a book, but I remember the cover. I can just scan through what I’ve read lately and pick it out of the list.

I’m not a rabble-rouser over there. I know there ARE rabble-rousers; trolls who do various things like bait authors into getting into fights, or bait other reviewers, or if – GASP! – you disagree with their evaluation of a book, call you names. NAMES! Can you even IMAGINE the HORROR!

I don’t get involved in the drama. I don’t care for that nonsense. I’m there to write reviews so people can make educated decisions of books before they purchase or read them, and for my own records. That’s all. That’s it.

Recently, Amazon purchased Goodreads. There was a LOT of uproar over this. Up until this point, Goodreads was an independent site for readers. How would the biggest online bookseller owning the site change things? People threatened to leave, and people left, and people moaned, and people groaned.

I’m a big Amazon fan (although I’m not blind to their issues; I just like their prices and convenience.) I decided to wait it out.

Well, Goodreads dropped the hammer last weekend. I assume only the first hammer. We are, I would guess, going to be nailed with so many hammers in the coming months that we’re going to want a platinum umbrella when we visit the site.

Right before leaving for the weekend, they put up the following announcement, but they didn’t make it obvious; they put it up in the forums, where as few people would see it as possible.

In case you don’t feel like clicking, here are some of the highlights:

“**Delete content focused on author behavior. We have had a policy of removing reviews that were created primarily to talk about author behavior from the community book page. Once removed, these reviews would remain on the member’s profile. Starting today, we will now delete these entirely from the site. We will also delete shelves and lists of books on Goodreads that are focused on author behavior. If you have questions about why a review was removed, send an email to support@goodreads.com. (And to answer the obvious question: of course, it’s appropriate to talk about an author within the context of a review as it relates to the book. If it’s an autobiography, then clearly you might end up talking about their lives. And often it’s relevant to understand an author’s background and how it influenced the story or the setting.)”

“To clarify, we haven’t deleted any book reviews in regard to this issue. The key word here is “book”. The reviews that have been deleted – and that we don’t think have a place on Goodreads – are reviews like “the author is an a**hole and you shouldn’t read this book because of that”. In other words, they are reviews of the author’s behavior and not relevant to the book. We believe books should stand on their own merit, and it seems to us that’s the best thing for readers.

“Someone used the word censorship to describe this. This is not censorship – this is setting an appropriate tone for a community site. We encourage members to review and shelve books in a way that makes sense for them, but reviews and shelves that focus primarily on author behavior do not belong on Goodreads. 

“Some people are perhaps interpreting this as you can’t discuss the author at all. This couldn’t be further from the case. The author is a part of the book and can certainly be discussed in relation to the book. But it has to be in a way that’s relevant to the book. Again, let’s judge books based on what’s inside them.

“Some people are concerned about their “not-interested” shelf or variants of that. We are not deleting those; you are free to keep cataloging books that way. We are deleting shelves like “author-is-a-jerk”, as they don’t fit our guiding principle that the book page be about the book.”

“Thank you for all the comments so far. One concern that has come up in this thread is that the content was deleted without those members first being told that our moderation policy had been revised. 

“In retrospect, we absolutely should have given users notice that our policies were changing before taking action on the items that were flagged. To the 21 members who were impacted: we’d like to sincerely apologize for jumping the gun on this. It was a mistake on our part, and it should not have happened.

“Anyone else with reviews or shelves created prior to September 21, 2013 that will be deleted under the revised policy will be sent a notification first and given time to decide what to do.”

OK, so let’s see what’s up here.

  • We’re no longer allowed to discuss authors when reviewing books. I know this SAYS it’s ok if it’s relevant to the book; we’ll discuss that in a minute.
  • Any reviews violating this rule will be deleted.
  • Any shelves labeled offensively toward the author? Also deleted.
  • Goodreads will be making these decisions. How? Arbitrarily, it seems.

Goodreads went around deleting things before even telling anyone they were doing it. They say it was only 21 people; more than 21 people are reporting it happened to them. Who’s to say who’s telling the truth, here? The big, bad company, now owned by Amazon, or people who aren’t getting paid and just love to read and write reviews?

Here’s my issue.

I understand if you review a memoir or an autobiography or sometimes even a collection of personal essays you’re probably going to have to touch on the author. Goodreads states very clearly here they won’t censor that (HA HA IT’S NOT CENSORSHIP! says Goodreads! We’re just telling you what you can and can’t say or do, and what to think! IT WAS A PLEASURE TO BURN!) but who knows what they’ll do. If they find it offensive, it’s gone.

It’s a nice thing, to say the author and his or her behavior and personal beliefs have nothing to do with a book; that it’s easy, just judge a book on the content, not the author. It’s an easy thing to say. It must be nice to live in such a black-and-white world.

However, I just read Ender’s Game.

And I can’t, in good conscience, review Ender’s Game on Goodreads.

Because I cannot, utterly cannot, divorce Ender’s Game from the beliefs of its author, Orson Scott Card. It would be a betrayal of my own beliefs, and a betrayal of a number of people I care about a great deal.

Would my review, among a veritable sea of reviews for the book (which was written in 1985) be a drop in the ocean? No. Not at all. But I don’t betray myself, not if I can help it.

So I’m going to review Ender’s Game here, because this is a safe place, and no one’s muzzling me on my own blog.

And as for Goodreads? I’ll continue using it, unless someone creates something comparable. There’s not another site out there that has the same functionality. But I think they need to stop fooling themselves: this is censorship, pure and simple. Not telling us what the rules are – or telling us, but not playing by them – and arbitrarily deleting our hard work because it doesn’t fit your rules, whatever they might be – this is censorship. Whether or not this was dictated by Amazon – my guess is yes, because it’s not good for a bookseller to have someone give bad reviews of books or authors, now, is it? – is irrelevant. We’re no longer welcome to share our real thoughts on things.

This scares the hell out of me, to be honest. To just do something like this, and think it’s ok? And to say no, no, this is not censorship?

Such a pleasure to burn.

I just finished Ender’s Game. Ender’s Game was a really wonderful book. I immediately got caught up in the story. I didn’t know what was going to happen; somehow, a book that’s almost thirty years old wasn’t spoiled for me, even though it’s a cult classic. There were two points at which I had actual tears.

Then what’s the problem, Amy? I can hear you asking. It was a good book! Yay! The world needs more of these!

The problem is that the author is a loathsome homophobe, and I can’t reconcile that with this book. It was bothering me the entire time I was reading.

Orson Scott Card doesn’t just disapprove of same-sex marriage and homosexuality. Orson Scott Card wants to BRING DOWN ANY GOVERNMENT THAT ALLOWS SUCH AN ABOMINATION. I wish I was kidding.

He also:

    • is a member of the board of directors of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), on whose agenda are things such as fighting against marriage equality, gay adoption, safe schools for LGBT students and the gay “lifestyle” as a whole;
    • has called same-sex attraction “reproductive dysfunction”
    • stated “Normalizing a dysfunction will only make ours into a society that corrodes any loyalty to it, as parents see that our laws and institutions now work against the reproductive success (not to mention happiness) of the next generation”
    • has equated homosexuality with pedophilia, and stated, “The dark secret of homosexual society — the one that dares not speak its name — is how many homosexuals first entered into that world through a disturbing seduction or rape or molestation or abuse, and how many of them yearn to get out of the homosexual community and live normally”
    • wrote a lengthy essay titled “The Hypocrites of Homosexuality” in which he admonishes gay people as nothing more than people who are giving in to sin and states that anti-sodomy laws should remain on the books, making homosexuality illegal in the U.S.

In 1985, he wrote a beautiful book about, among other things, a child forced to grow up far too quickly, and the grownups around him who use him as a blunt weapon for their own ends. Ironically, he also loaded it with homosexual subtext. But hey, it’s much easier to be shouty about the HORROR! the HORROR! of teh EVIL GAYZ! than to deal with whatever he has going on in his own closet.

I can’t reconcile this book with this hate speech. This really is a beautiful book. It’s full of huge thoughts and themes. It’s kind of groundbreaking; I could name a ton of books that have taken the lead from what happened in this book. The characters were fully-fleshed and relatable. I loved Ender. Utterly adored him.

But the man that wrote it hates some of the people I love more than anyone in the world. And he’s loud about it. And the last thing we need in this day and age is someone who had a podium and had the nation’s ear (the movie of this book is coming out in a couple of months) shouting hate-speech.

The book was about how we ill-use our children; I’d argue that teaching them hate from a young age is ill-using them, Mr. Card.

I won’t be reading the rest of the series. This book ended perfectly. I don’t need any more of his books. I just can’t divorce the author from the work. It hurts to do so.

I’m glad I met Ender. And, for what it’s worth? He’d find his creator’s views repulsive. The character you created, sir, has more compassion and character than you do. And he’s fictional. Do you see the problem here?

(For more on the Goodreads controversy, please read sj’s take, This is Me. Getting involved., Emma Wolf’s take, Where capitalism and art intersect, and Charleen’s take, Goodbye to Goodreads?)

Sources:

Orson Scott Card’s Anti-Gay Views Prompt ‘Ender’s Game’ Movie Protest (Huffington Post)
Ender’s Game, Superman and Anti-Gay Bigotry (Huffington Post)


An Open Letter to Amazon, on Receipt of Your Most Recent Email of Recommendations

Dear Amazon:

We need to have a talk.

Listen, I know. I use your service a lot. I’m a very loyal customer. And I’m not writing to complain. Well, not really. Not much, anyway.

I’m the first to admit I’ve become a wee bit obsessed with you lately. Ever since you wooed me with Amazon Prime. Now I don’t have to wait until I want $25 worth of your products to order! Free two-day shipping! It’s kind of the best/worst thing ever. Best in that I get almost instant gratification; worst in that I might be spending a wee bit more money on your site than I should be.

But that’s not why I’m writing.

I wanted to address this email situation.

When I got my Kindle at the beginning of the year, I signed up for your daily Kindle deal email. I like this email because sometimes there are books on there that I really want for .99. NINETY-NINE CENTS! This is very exciting. Good books, too. Books that I want to own on my Kindle. I’ve gotten very picky about what I purchase in paper (not because I’m snobby, but because space in my tiny home is at a premium, and my books are reaching critical mass and leaning here and there all willy-nilly and sometimes I come home and the stacks have tipped over and I just know that Dumbcat narrowly escaped literature-related doom while I was gone and NO, I don’t have room in here for any more bookcases, believe me, if that was an option, I’d have done it by now. THERE IS NO ROOM, DAMMIT!) so owning them on my space-saving little Kindle is really just the best thing.

I'm a little obsessed with the Kindle. Just a wee bit.

I’m a little obsessed with the Kindle. Just a wee bit.

However, recently, you’ve been sending me a lot more email. And it’s…well, it’s not geared toward my interests. I have to wonder what’s going on.

Especially after the one today.

“Customers who purchased popular titles might be interested in our picks for the 20 Big Fall Books, part of our Big Fall Books Preview.”

Well, I guess you can ASSUME that MOST people would be interested in “big fall books.” I mean, they’re BIG for a reason. Right? And the authors on this list are fancy, I guess. Lee Child. Sue Grafton. John Grisham.

Thing is? I don’t read “popular titles.” Well, not often, anyway.

Looking over this email, there’s not a single book that’s a must-read for me. There’s Margaret Atwood’s new book, but I didn’t love the Oryx and Crake series, so I’m not desperate for it and probably won’t read it. Other than that? There’s a Malcolm Gladwell that doesn’t look terrible, and the rest?

Nope.

And Amazon, what I’m perplexed by is that I don’t BUY popular titles. I thought at first it was because I pre-ordered the new King book, but I did that after I received this email. And I haven’t purchased any other popular titles from you. I’ve purchased some older books, some reference books, some poetry, and a lot of e-books, but none of them “popular.”

John Grisham? Come on, Amazon. I thought we had a thing. I thought we KNEW each other. I’ve never read a John Grisham in my life; I don’t like courtroom drama. Asking me to read a John Grisham is like asking me to read a (shudder) Dan Brown.

What do you MEAN, Amy? Don't you want my latest book? DON'T YOU? Everyone does!

What do you MEAN, Amy? Don’t you want my latest book? DON’T YOU? Everyone does!

I get it. Most people like these things. I’m not judging them. That’s their thing. If it makes ’em happy, and doesn’t hurt anyone else, well, more power to them, you know? Live and let live, Amazon. Live and let live. So you thought you’d send me this because MOST people would like this.

Oh, Amazon. Look over my purchase history. I’m not most people. No one wants to think they’re “most people,” you know? I THOUGHT YOU THOUGHT I WAS SPECIAL. My heart, she is broken.

Send me an email about the best small-press books of the fall. Send me an email about the most talked-about poetry collections. Send me an email about new graphic novels people are talking about, or young adult novels, or fantasy novels.

But inundating my inbox (not a euphemism, Amazon) with emails that do not pertain to me, and mostly just make me wrinkle my nose at how you not only don’t know me at all, but didn’t even take five minutes to look at my purchase history…

Yeah. That’s a huge marketing fail, Amazon. And you’re a big company. You’re savvy. You can do better than this.

If you want the pretty girl to like you, pay attention to what she likes and then bring that up in conversation, Amazon. Sheesh, it’s like you never did this before! I shouldn’t have to give you advice on how to woo a lay-dee.

You’re on double-secret probation with me. Watch your step, or I’m going to unsubscribe from your emails.  I don’t think you want that. You certainly do send enough of them. It would put SUCH a kink in your day.

Most sincerely yours,

Lucy’s Football.


%d bloggers like this: