When a couple books showed up at the door early in the week, the realization sunk in that there’s a lot of books in my other TBR pile — the “to be reviewed” stack. By my count, I have at least six books to review that [...]]]> It was one of those weeks it seems like.

When a couple books showed up at the door early in the week, the realization sunk in that there’s a lot of books in my other TBR pile — the “to be reviewed” stack. By my count, I have at least six books to review that either have been released or will hit the stores by August 17. In terms of reading, that’s doable at basically two books a week. Still, as I’ve noted before, review reading is different from “normal” reading for me and it takes time afterwards to write the reviews. Of course, it didn’t stop me from picking up two books at the used book store during a Saturday trip there

Then, of course, when I turned on my home desktop computer last Monday evening, there was what the computer world likes to call a fatal operating system error message. In English, the machine would not boot up. Thus, I spent several hours each night trying to get it back to where it was (and save years of tax and financial records). While I succeeded for the most part, the only reading I got done those nights came while updates for the original operating system were downloading and installing and I was restarting the computer (far too many times than I care to count). Doesn’t do a great deal for one’s concentration or even tracking a story.

Yes, woe is me. I avoided a computer disaster and have too many books to read. If that’s what I have to complain about, life is pretty good.

Robert Fulghum, Uh-Oh

Lots of people will agree with him that many Amazon reviews, such as those that dismiss Anna Karenina or Madame Bovary simply as boring, “serve no purpose at all.” Yet when he [...]]]> Essays about book reviewing, particularly those by authors, intrigue me. Certainly, the views Charles Baxter expresses in Owl Criticism are worthy of note.

Lots of people will agree with him that many Amazon reviews, such as those that dismiss Anna Karenina or Madame Bovary simply as boring, “serve no purpose at all.” Yet when he recognizes in the next sentence that they do serve a purpose, he may raise some hackles, particularly among online book reviewers and book bloggers. The Amazon reviews he criticizes just “establish that in an Age of the Imperial Self, any one person’s opinion is equal to everybody else’s, and the mice can review the cat, if they want to.” It is, though, one of a couple awfully broad strokes regarding a valid concern.

The title of Baxter’s essay comes from his contention that too many reviews are the equivalent of saying, “This book has an owl in it, and I don’t like owls.” To him, a review must “take the trouble of telling us where a poem or a novel or a book of stories fits into our cultural life, and then has to tell us how its content is located in its form. If it doesn’t do either, it’s not a good review.” Certainly, Baxter’s bottom line assertion that some level of understanding is essential for a good review is well-taken. Conclusory statements alone aren’t a review but, again, the breadth of Baxter’s assertion may prove too much.

As Mark Athitakis points out, “The ‘formal properties’ of a book are important, but those aren’t the only aspects of it worth reviewing.” Particularly with literary fiction, it can be important to place a work in context, whether culturally or in terms of the author’s other work. At bottom, though, reading is a personal experience. If our assessments of what we read don’t reflect how a work affects us, then we tend toward the pedantic. As long as a reviewer explains why, I don’t see anything wrong with calling a work “boring” or “stunning,” another term Baxter disdains.

To be fair, Baxter’s essay should also be placed in context. He says passion is important to a good review. And his comments were originally part of a panel presentation on “Criticism in the Age of Book Blogs and Amazon.com.” Moreover, that panel was presented at the 2011 conference for The Association of Writers and Writing Programs. The latter, of course, includes programs that actually award degrees, including masters and doctorates, in creative writing. Speaking as an self-acknowledged illiterati, I often fear MFAs spend a bit too much time pondering esoterica.

That said, Baxter does have has some legitimate points. A critic really should put their criticism in context and explain their reasoning instead of resorting to hyperbole. In that regard, I certainly hope I “review” more than I hoot. Yet even the hoots of an unwise owl may have some validity when considered in the context and universe of other sounds.

Henry Miller, Sexus

I got home [...]]]> Once again I have proof why I don’t do New Year’s resolutions. Just last week I said “less is more” when it came to my reading in 2011 and specifically mentioned cutting down on reading books for review. That sounded great — until those wily publishers came metaphorically knocking upon my door.

I got home Monday night to a stack of summer catalogs from publishers. It has hard to battle lust. Assuming all the books show up (which is not always the case), as of today I will be reviewing 14 books coming out between April and mid-July. Indubitably, my bibliolust surges when it comes to new books, particularly those I might be able to lay my hands on before they hit the street. Still, I passed on at least four other review copies I was considering requesting, which arguably means I was only operating at a three-quarters lust level.

Of course, the review list is without regard to the summer catalogs yet to show up at the door or the handful of books from a couple other publishers I haven’t requested yet simply because the advances are in ebook format. (No, the transition to ebooks is not an easy one for this old fart). And, of course, Monday I also added a book to my “to read” list at the library and put one on reserve.

While “less is more” wasn’t a resolution, it is plain that when it comes to books more is, in fact, more — and the TBR shelves be damned.

Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere’s Fan

I’ve subscribed to the NYT Book Review for a number of years and, off and on, a variety of other book review (Bookforum) and book-oriented (The Believer) publications. And, of course, I have a number of [...]]]>

Do you read book reviews? Do you let them change your mind about reading/not reading a particular book?

I’ve subscribed to the NYT Book Review for a number of years and, off and on, a variety of other book review (Bookforum) and book-oriented (The Believer) publications. And, of course, I have a number of book review and book-oriented blogs in my RSS reader.

If I know I am going to review a book, I don’t read reviews of it to avoid any sort of predisposition or influence. I also don’t read the reviews until after I have written my review.

Otherwise, I read a large number of reviews but their effect varies. Sometimes, it is simply that I don’t think the book will interest me. Other times, a favorable inclination created by one review may be offset by a couple others and vice versa. As much as I hate to admit it, though, I don’t really pay too close attention to who may have reviewed a book in the NYT or elsewhere to see what their track record with me might be. Like with the books themselves, there’s so many reviews and so little time.

George Orwell, “Confessions of a Book Reviewer”