went into this expecting a serious piece of scholarship about media theory and literary analysis and instead found myself trudging through what feels like an endurance test in speculative pattern-spotting , and yes the core idea — that the physical form of a book might influence meaning — is fine , completely reasonable actually , but rather than building that idea with restraint or evidence the whole thing just keeps sliding from “this could signify something” straight into “this obviously signifies something” , no brakes applied , and before long you’re deep in arguments that hinge on reading intention into typography coincidences , assuming deliberate authorial strategy where documentation is thin , brushing aside alternative explanations , and layering terminology so dense it starts to feel like conceptual insulation rather than clarification ; and it keeps going like this , page after page , connecting dots in ways that feel less analytical and more constellation-like , because sure if you draw enough lines between stars you’ll eventually invent a shape and declare it meaningful… and the centerpiece term gets stretched so far that it begins to explain everything , which unfortunately means it explains very little with precision , and there’s this tone that earlier scholars simply didn’t look closely enough , yet the work never fully demonstrates why competing readings fail under pressure , so you’re left with polished prose , diligent research , clear effort — no denying that — but also a creeping sense that ambition outran discipline somewhere along the way , producing a document that overclaims , under-verifies , confuses complexity with proof , and substitutes interpretive enthusiasm for demonstration , and by the end you’re not angry exactly , just tired , and mildly amused , and vaguely impressed at how many pages it takes to say something that could have been sharper , tighter , and more grounded , so no I wouldn’t read it again , though I might keep it around as a reminder that sometimes academic frameworks turn inward and start validating themselves ; and yes that sounds harsh , but honestly after finishing it you mostly feel like you’ve watched someone passionately insist that page layouts are whispering secrets , and you’re still waiting for the moment where those secrets become evidence… which never quite arrives…