As a European (German) I didnt really know about the "controversy", but it seems I dont need to - it seems to be a usual "famous person says something and then equate criticsm with censorship - but onl criticism of them, not of the other side". This has plagued many fields.
And yet I absolutly liked your writeup for its nuances and arguments. Thats how its done.
Well, Ann Patchett was certainly wrong in the advice she gave you--nothing in the least wrong with mixing comic and tragic in one work.
I'm just a little nobody who's only been published online--but I've been reading all my life, and I do, absolutely, know what I like, and what I don't, and what I recognize as great writing and what I think is lousy, no matter how many fine important people might try to claim the opposite--and great writing comes from breaking rules really well. Elmore Leonard's "Ten Rules of Writing" thrilled me because I'd figured some of them out for myself and I was glad to see my own instincts validated.
I know you guys make a living from all of this gazing at navels--one's own and the linty ones of others--but really, it's all too many words in the end. A great book, or a pretty good one--you know it when you read it. The literary criticism industry--well, people gotta make a living, and one can make a good one out of the words of others.
I missed this book and the subsequent kerfuffle - possibly b/c I was in Italy for 4 months during the pandemic and my head was elsewhere. So I very much appreciate your assessment and, without having read the book, agree with your stand. Some books receive way too much praise for mediocre writing all for the sake of the subject. My most recent disgust in this arena is The Last White Man by Mohsin Hamid. Everyone heralded this book as a must-read while I spent the first half of it irritated that he scalped the basis of Kafka's The Metamorphosis - and done so poorly - and the second half begging him to use more periods. Maybe his run-on sentences are considered some form of brilliant stream-of-consciousness but I felt they reduced his characters to limp stereotypes with no strong convictions or emotions. Sure, I understand what he was trying to say in this short novel and yes this is a topic worth discussing but please let's not confuse the topic with the writing. Sadly, I can also see this novel being optioned for a movie.
Thank you for reminding me that I need to read books and make up my own mind. If I need a review to help me decide the value of the written word (or the string of them) I probably should get my cranium checked out. And maybe my spine. And for reminding me that a "review" is just an opinion that can totally trash a great read. Resolution: I am going to read more books during the time I would have read a review.
Bracingly forthright, John - thanks! "The empathy of book critics should extend no further than believing the author wrote the best book possible. The criticism seems harsh because the book did not live up to its purported promise. That’s not the critic’s problem." Indeed.
Your Ann Patchett story reminded me of the time Wendell Berry wrote to me (in longhand, in pencil) in response to an essay I had sent him unsolicited: "This is a bad piece of work." Like you, I eventually survived :-)
I remember reading prepub reviews of both The Help and American Dirt--in the case of The Help I even remember where I was sitting, what the light was like, what journal it was--and thinking "these books are going to be big, and they are probably terrible." I take some small pride in knowing I was right (I thought the same thing about Twilight, making that a lucky three?), but it's not precisely the sort of thing I want to be right about.
That said, yes, by all means, read whatever you want. Also feel free to criticize whatever you want. Every book its reader; every reader their book. And to all of us, I hope, the right to engage, converse, criticize, and reconsider.
This was great, restored a bit of belief we aren’t all total idiots, thank you for writing it!
As a European (German) I didnt really know about the "controversy", but it seems I dont need to - it seems to be a usual "famous person says something and then equate criticsm with censorship - but onl criticism of them, not of the other side". This has plagued many fields.
And yet I absolutly liked your writeup for its nuances and arguments. Thats how its done.
"You’ll pry my Reacher novels out of my cold dead hands." Mine too.
Well, Ann Patchett was certainly wrong in the advice she gave you--nothing in the least wrong with mixing comic and tragic in one work.
I'm just a little nobody who's only been published online--but I've been reading all my life, and I do, absolutely, know what I like, and what I don't, and what I recognize as great writing and what I think is lousy, no matter how many fine important people might try to claim the opposite--and great writing comes from breaking rules really well. Elmore Leonard's "Ten Rules of Writing" thrilled me because I'd figured some of them out for myself and I was glad to see my own instincts validated.
I know you guys make a living from all of this gazing at navels--one's own and the linty ones of others--but really, it's all too many words in the end. A great book, or a pretty good one--you know it when you read it. The literary criticism industry--well, people gotta make a living, and one can make a good one out of the words of others.
I missed this book and the subsequent kerfuffle - possibly b/c I was in Italy for 4 months during the pandemic and my head was elsewhere. So I very much appreciate your assessment and, without having read the book, agree with your stand. Some books receive way too much praise for mediocre writing all for the sake of the subject. My most recent disgust in this arena is The Last White Man by Mohsin Hamid. Everyone heralded this book as a must-read while I spent the first half of it irritated that he scalped the basis of Kafka's The Metamorphosis - and done so poorly - and the second half begging him to use more periods. Maybe his run-on sentences are considered some form of brilliant stream-of-consciousness but I felt they reduced his characters to limp stereotypes with no strong convictions or emotions. Sure, I understand what he was trying to say in this short novel and yes this is a topic worth discussing but please let's not confuse the topic with the writing. Sadly, I can also see this novel being optioned for a movie.
Thank you for reminding me that I need to read books and make up my own mind. If I need a review to help me decide the value of the written word (or the string of them) I probably should get my cranium checked out. And maybe my spine. And for reminding me that a "review" is just an opinion that can totally trash a great read. Resolution: I am going to read more books during the time I would have read a review.
Yay! Preach! and all that stuff. This is terrific. Thanks for writing it.
Bracingly forthright, John - thanks! "The empathy of book critics should extend no further than believing the author wrote the best book possible. The criticism seems harsh because the book did not live up to its purported promise. That’s not the critic’s problem." Indeed.
Your Ann Patchett story reminded me of the time Wendell Berry wrote to me (in longhand, in pencil) in response to an essay I had sent him unsolicited: "This is a bad piece of work." Like you, I eventually survived :-)
I remember reading prepub reviews of both The Help and American Dirt--in the case of The Help I even remember where I was sitting, what the light was like, what journal it was--and thinking "these books are going to be big, and they are probably terrible." I take some small pride in knowing I was right (I thought the same thing about Twilight, making that a lucky three?), but it's not precisely the sort of thing I want to be right about.
That said, yes, by all means, read whatever you want. Also feel free to criticize whatever you want. Every book its reader; every reader their book. And to all of us, I hope, the right to engage, converse, criticize, and reconsider.