I think I was just in school too long. Because I don't find it charming when academics - or writers with an academic tone -take on a decidedly non-academic subject to give it some sort of depth or gravity. For as exciting as the Anita Blake series is, this book is just boring. And not in the highbrow-writing-goes-on-and-on boring. More of that-was-obvious-before-you-said-it boring. Do you really need a book full of essays to tell you that Anita gets along better with men than women, or that the series changed at book 6? Don't underestimate our intelligence.

Case in point:

pg. 185, by Jacob Clifton: " I contend that Laurell K Hamilton's Anita Blake series is a postmodern work exploring these two particular lines of genesis - fulfilling the demands of both its genre and, commercially, satisfaction for the reader - and embracing them so wholeheartedly that the end product cannot help but be transgressive."

Dude. Get over yourself. Anita raises zombies for a living. She's about as postmodern as they come.

Literary criticism walks a fine line: at its best it helps the reader find new connections s/he never expected (like between Anita Blake and Jane Eyre? Okay, I'll admit I never saw that one coming). At its worst it makes the reader think, how do you people get off doing this for a living, instead of, say, trying to cure cancer or getting people to recycle or something?

There are a few redeeming sections here. First, Laurell has a comment on each essay, which at first bothered me but by the end was a saving grace, and pulled the essays together. She still has full control of the world she created, and sometimes a rebuttal was appropriate. If I were her, I'd be infinitely flattered and proud about a book like this, and I'm glad too the book is in the world. I just don't want to have to read it again.

Lilith Saintcrow's essay is, as always for Lilith, smart. And the essay by attorney Melissa L. Tatum on the legal rights of zombies is as entertaining as can be, under the circumstances.