Posted By:
Paul SI think your review is more like a nice extended summary of the book, rather than a critique, which is okay by me. And for the general public it might pave the way to their reading it were they ever mildly interested in the subject. Because it really isn't a traditional critique, there really isn't much (for myself) to agree or disagree with (stricly in terms of your review, not in terms of what I think of the book myself.) Not that this bothers me, I'm just commenting on the style.
Since you are a collector yourself you were going to have to either dig in with your own opinion or hang back and just lay out the general plot, which you did. That's cool, but for my tastes just a tad innocuous, since you have cred as both a journalist AND a collector, and I doubt we'll see too many of your brand reviewer for this book. I thinked you nailed it in your wrap-up comment about how the Wagner has transended the hobby to the point where it might not matter at all whether or not it's been altered. To me personally, that's the sad truth, the point where the hobby becomes a business that claims that no matter what I will ever do (in the hobby), it will never be as important as maintaining as others maintaining an illusion, at any cost/price. In that philosophical light, I'd say the Wagner has transended that fact that it is a card at all.