It recently occurred to me that some of you may not be googling the phrase "An Abundance of Katherines" every 37 minutes, and that I might should bring you up to date on what the Internets are saying about my new book.

But first, some news from the print world: "Katherines" has received a starred review (which is good; it's like remember in third grade when the best fingerpaintings got stars put on them? It's like that) from Booklist. Incidentally, you should read the Booklist Blog. It's great.

But back to the Internet: I should warn you in advance that many of these reviews/comments contain "spoilers," which is to say that they tell you a little bit about what Katherines is about, and maybe a little bit about what happens. But fear not. I will give you a good sense of the degree of spoileration in each review. I'm including every review indexed on google, positive or negative, with the most recent first:

Bookshelves of Doom
Gist of Review: "As much as I loved and appreciated Looking for Alaska, I enjoyed Katherines more." So that's good.
Spoiler Level: Very low. Nothing is revealed that happens after page 25.

Barbara Gordon
Gist of Review: "A funnier, more experimental book than Alaska."
Spoiler Level: Moderate. There may be a few things you'd rather not know, but nothing terribly important is given away.

Gwendabond [Scroll down to #29.]
Gist of Review: "Such great fun and beautifully done."
Spoiler Level: Zero, although she promises a "full review" closer to the pub date, which could be spoilerific.

Little Willow
Gist of Review: "Fans of John Green's Printz Award-winning novel Looking for Alaska will not be disappointed by his sophomore effort. Though the stories themselves are vastly different, with Abundance being much lighter in tone than Alaska, both novels boast intelligent writing and memorable characters."
Spoiler Alert: Pretty low, considering how long and thoughtful (and nicely written, I think, although obviously I am biased because the review made me happy) it is.

Zubon Book Reviews
Gist of Review: How does one follow up winning the Printz Award on his first novel? How about writing another one that could win it the next year?" [nota bene: *EDIT*I meant to say The Book Thief WILL win the Printz Award this year. In a landslide. As it ought to.]
Spoiler Level: HIGH. But it's a great read after you've read the book.

Pinky's Paperhaus
Gist of Review: "I thought it was great."
Spoiler Level: Slightly high, considering the whole review is about thirty words.

Propernoun.net
Gist of Review: "I can't imagine a better follow-up to Looking for Alaska."
Spoiler Level: Moderate, but lower than the average print review. It does reveal that the book has an appendix, but hey, I just revealed that, too.

Llew's Reviews
Gist of Review: "Overall, it's a highly amusing teen book and had me in stitches. It's no great work of literature, nor is it as emotionally strong as Looking For Alaska."
Spoiler Level: Quite low, although the reviewer does reveal--spoiler alert!!!--that I'm "not an uggo." Nice!

Cedar Librarian (scroll down to #5)
Gist of Review: "Overall, not a bad book, and definitely a great addition to the "literary" genre of teen books, but nowhere near the Printz (but then again, I personally didn't much care for Looking for Alaksa, either)."
Spoiler Level: High, and I'm not just saying that because the reviewer and I have a profound disagreement about what constitutes dialogue.

My friend Dean
Gist of Review: "Good times." [It should be noted for the record, however, that Dean has not technically read the book.]
Spoiler Level: Low.

So basically, the reviews have largely been good. Which I can only assume means that all the reviewers who hated it just haven't gotten around to writing about it.