There's certainly information in there, I agree, but it's badly delivered.
We're more than 20 years past Douglas' untimely death. People writing new pieces on him now need to be writing much more appealingly or, if they're only going to deliver information without any flair, boil it down to just that, the newer or lesser known information they are presenting without all the detail that most even moderate fans of Adams are already familiar with.
In Hamlet, Polonious declaims that :
“Since brevity is the soul of wit / And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes, I will be brief…”
and then goes on and on at pompous length. Adams truly understood that brevity was the soul of wit and showed it in his writing. The author of this blog piece doesn't.
>Adams truly understood that brevity was the soul of wit
Hadn't really twigged that aspect but I think you're correct.
So he combined deep ideas with humour and brevity. He also had to carry his torch post-Hitchhikers, a show which had had creative input from other talented people in addition to his own.
Small wonder he found writing hard. It must have been really really hard.
We're more than 20 years past Douglas' untimely death. People writing new pieces on him now need to be writing much more appealingly or, if they're only going to deliver information without any flair, boil it down to just that, the newer or lesser known information they are presenting without all the detail that most even moderate fans of Adams are already familiar with.
In Hamlet, Polonious declaims that :
“Since brevity is the soul of wit / And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes, I will be brief…”
and then goes on and on at pompous length. Adams truly understood that brevity was the soul of wit and showed it in his writing. The author of this blog piece doesn't.