elanya

I am suddenly unsure about a technical point of writing, so I will put it out here.

I am writing a comparitive book review. I know that the autho of oen of the books is dead, and of course, both books are already written.. Habit and instinct tell me that when I am writing this kind of piece I shoudl be writing about what the author(s) *are doing* as opposed to what they *did*. But not *have done*, though, because the passive voice is bad. At least, it is in History ^-^.

So, am I correct? Do books immortalize people in thise sense? Shoudl I refer to things in the present tense? I know I shoudln't anthropomorphize the books themselves ("This text says that the Duke of Parma can kick yo ass, fool!"), but that if I were goign to I could use present tense... I'm just unclear. mattingly's book speaks for him right? In it, he *says* that not even Nelson could have lead the Armada to victory. Not *said*... Right?

Anyone?

No, I am *not* being overly picky about this, either.