Dear Sci-fi-online,

I have just read with interest your review of Fall Out: The Unofficial and Totally Authorised Guide to The Prisoner [sic], and was particularly taken with the following extracts. Firstly:-

"The authors also tell us that their book isn't analytical. Really?"

No, the authors actually state that the book won't be "too analytical. Neither of us are from a media studies background and, while this undoubtedly has its place, we are writing with a popular audience in mind". To translate, this means that the book will not resemble the sort of analytical text you would get from an academic publication.

Secondly:-

"It certainly includes great swathes of copy that appears to be just that, although on closer reading much of the analysis - which we're told doesn't exist - is really foundless opinion, so I suppose the writers are correct in a fashion."

Show me something you believe to be "foundless opinion" and we'll debate it. After all, if you believe you can make a statement like that, then you shouldn't be surprised if I then ask you to back it up.

Cheers

Alan Steven
Co author: Fall Out: The Unofficial and Unauthorised Guide to The Prisoner

Return to: