I have come across a common theme in reviews that really bugs me. I came across it largely when doing some research for a review I wrote on Rook by Sharon Cameron a couple of months ago (yes, I am only now getting around to writing this discussion). People often, in negative reviews (or positive ones) state that one of the things that made a book bad was the slow pacing. Slow pacing isn’t necessarily a bad thing and people tend to be a bit hypocritical: the majority of classics are slow paced, but we don’t seem to critique them the same way. And slow paced doesn’t mean boring!
Let me know what you think about this issue!