From The Elegant Variation:
That got me thinking about my own reviewing habits. For my first review for the New York Times Book Review, James Wilcox’s Hunk City, I read his eight prior novels. Afterwards, I found myself wondering about the use of my time and my mania for thoroughness (or my OCD, if you prefer). One the one hand, only one of the eight books is mentioned specifically in the review – Modern Baptists, to which Hunk City is a sequel. And in a review of typical length – let’s say 500 to 800 words – there’s no real way to deploy that kind of information (without looking like you’re showing off). But it seemed to me not just worthwhile but essential to be steeped in his body of work – to understand his overarching aesthetic project, and to be clear on how seamlessly (or not) the new book fit into his oeuvre.
It’s a labor of love. Thank goodness there are people willing to do it.
Filed under: authors, books, reading, writing Tagged: | book reviewing, Mark Sarvas, The Elegant Variation
On the other hand, Elizabeth, your serious and intensive approach to reviewing is exactly the kind of dignified treatment I would like accorded me if I was a writer being reviewed. Too many reviews are slight and superficial, the aesthetic and intellectual equivalent of “thumbs up” (or down). I expect more from intelligent, articulate critics, who are, sadly, in short supply in literature these days. Thanks for this…
Wow, thanks, Cliff! You’re very kind. No matter how much one puts into reviewing, it’s nothing compared to the effort it takes to write a truthful book — whether fiction or nonfiction.
good to see this