October 10, 2005
Wish I'd Thought of That
You can always count on our pals over at The Literary Saloon to be among the smartest folks in the room.
They've weighed in on the Whiter Book Reviews post with an exceedingly interesting question of their own:
Recent high-profile (if far more 'literary' (at least so the popular opinion)) titles like the new books by Coetzee and Rushdie seem to us to be a more interesting approach to the question: both have been widely reviewed, and it's here one might wonder whether or not review-space might not be put to better use.
And you know what? He's right. I'm not saying I have an answer (Hah! I leave the heavy lifting to others) but the question is a fine one. Who, after all, needs a twelfth and thirteenth review of either of these titles? (See the LA Times' late-to-the-game review of the new Berendt as a case in point.) I imagine that most papers feel they need to cover such titles to maintain their Seriousness Quotient but with space at such a premium, wouldn't it be the brave reviewer indeed who bypassed both in favor of something like The Pagoda in the Garden or Cold Skin?
What do you guys think? Unless you've got the limitless online storage space to keep a vast archive, why not consider a radical take on refashioning book reviews?
Posted by mark.sarvas at October 10, 2005 08:24 PM