The following comments were left by the assessors: (edit ยท refresh)
I wouldn't presume to edit the actual article, because I have been assigned to read and comment on this book at my university, and have grown to hate it, but if there is someone out there who does edit this article, please take what I have to say into consideration.
This book is raft with logical impossibilities, and dull reoccurring ideas. Specifically, there is an idea of a divide of two types of people, the happy ones and the unhappy, and most of the stories end with a surprise twist of everyone being unhappy. There is also a tendency for the flow of time to change it's behavior to fit the whim of the author, without reason or warning. I don't mean from dream to dream, I mean from the start of a dream to it's ending. For example: In the chapter titled, "3 June 1905" the dream starts with the concept that a life time consists of a single day. The author explains this by saying that either the people have accelerated lives, or that the cosmic motions are slowed. In the end of the dream, we are told that "People heed time like cats straining to hear sounds in the attic." How can this be? If our whole lifetime takes a day, and if a day last our whole lifetime, why should time become more precious? Isn't this forgetting that the observer doesn't notice fluctuations in time? The author himself states just this in the chapter "June 20th 1905".
I just thought that it should be noted that although this novel is very poetic, it's not very well thought out, and there are contradictions everywhere. It might be appropriate to link to some sort of review of the novel. Josiah4jc 19:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
