So much for less is more

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 e-books 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