Man Booker Prize judge lashes out at book bloggers

EMaree · Sep 25, 2012

The rise of blogging has proved particularly worrying, he says. "Eventually that will be to the detriment of literature. It will be bad for readers; as much as one would like to think that many bloggers opinions are as good as others. It just ain't so. People will be encouraged to buy and read books that are no good, the good will be overwhelmed, and we'll be worse off. There are some important issues here."

Article here.

In my opinion this guy's full of himself, but I'm curious what my fellow AW memembers think?

Strange Chemistry editor Amanda had a great commenton Twitter about the line "In a normal year, you might read 20 novels.". She said 'Those book bloggers your'e slamming read WAY more'.

I read around 40 books in a year, and I know bloggers who read far more than that.

EDIT: I originally linked to the article with the statement 'What a pr**k'. Sorry for any offense caused.

KTC · Sep 25, 2012

who cares how many books people read in a year. doesn't make people better readers. doesn't give people better taste.

i see exactly where the judge is coming from.

EMaree · Sep 25, 2012

Eh, I personally consider it important that I read a lot of books in a year. It keeps me up-to-date on the market and focussed. I don't lose reading time to games/films/procrastinating when I know I have books to read. And it does help improve my taste: I get a better handle on what I like, what I dislike, and what just doesn't grip me.

But what's your opinion on bloggers having less of a valid opinion that critics? I think it swings both ways: some critics are terrible, some bloggers are terrible, but a lot of critics and bloggers are brilliant and I'd trust their opinion in an instant.

KTC · Sep 25, 2012

I think critics do it professionally and bloggers do it as a hobby. I think that makes my stance clear.

Anninyn · Sep 25, 2012

There are plenty of bloggers for whom that is their career.

And doing it as a hobby doesn't make you any less of an incisive reader with things to say about a work. I have a few book bloggers whose opinions I trust because they've proven that their opinions are well thought out and backed up with evidence. Equally, there are critics who I wouldn't trust at all, because they've proven they'll mislead or outright lie as a way to get more readers.

KTC · Sep 25, 2012

I'm not saying that...I'm saying that obviously, it's getting watered down. For every excellent blogger giving a great and incisive review, there are 1000 bad bloggers. A dog can do it...they just have to sign up.

mccardey · Sep 25, 2012

KTC said:
I'm not saying that...I'm saying that obviously, it's getting watered down. For every excellent blogger giving a great and incisive review, there are 1000 bad bloggers. A dog can do it...they just have to sign up.

No, they really can't. Because, paws...

see?

<

KTC · Sep 25, 2012

mccardey said:
No, they really can't. Because, paws...

see?

<

Don't make me create a video book blog account for my dog, put a book in front of her and ask her to speak about it. You don't need thumbs to blog these days...just someone to register your blog.

PS: FWIW - I have a book review blog.

mccardey · Sep 25, 2012

KTC said:
Don't make me create a video book blog account for my dog, put a book in front of her and ask her to speak about it. .

Oh, go on - please...

EMaree · Sep 25, 2012

Anninyn said:
And doing it as a hobby doesn't make you any less of an incisive reader with things to say about a work. I have a few book bloggers whose opinions I trust because they've proven that their opinions are well thought out and backed up with evidence. Equally, there are critics who I wouldn't trust at all, because they've proven they'll mislead or outright lie as a way to get more readers.

I definitely agree with this.

mccardey · Sep 25, 2012

Anninyn said:
Equally, there are critics who I wouldn't trust at all, because they've proven they'll mislead or outright lie as a way to get more readers.

Who? (PM me if you like

)

shadowwalker · Sep 25, 2012

I think the seeming proliferation of paid-for reviews speaks eloquently of the 'quality' of blog reviews. Anyone can review a book, and certainly has a right to. But how much use are they to a reader? People who do it professionally are not going to be influenced by things that have nothing to do with the book itself, or the quality of the writing. They aren't doing it for shits and giggles - their professional reputation is on the line.

Note: I pay no attention to reviews, professional or otherwise. But I would certainly give more credence to someone who does it for a living than I would Joe Schmoe.

KTC · Sep 25, 2012

shadowwalker said:
I think the seeming proliferation of paid-for reviews speaks eloquently of the 'quality' of blog reviews. Anyone can review a book, and certainly has a right to. But how much use are they to a reader? People who do it professionally are not going to be influenced by things that have nothing to do with the book itself, or the quality of the writing. They aren't doing it for shits and giggles - their professional reputation is on the line.

Note: I pay no attention to reviews, professional or otherwise. But I would certainly give more credence to someone who does it for a living than I would Joe Schmoe.

In lieu of a 'like' button--- 'LIKE'

EMaree · Sep 25, 2012

Sean Cummings weighs in.

veinglory · Sep 25, 2012

Sir Peter is sad that he and his friends are no longer the sole arbiters of what is "good". Something they wish to do without reference to what the reader wants or needs from their purchase.

My heart bleeds for him.

Amadan · Sep 25, 2012

KTC said:
I'm not saying that...I'm saying that obviously, it's getting watered down. For every excellent blogger giving a great and incisive review, there are 1000 bad bloggers.

Just like for every excellent author who writes great books, there are 1000 bad authors. Sir Peter's complaint is no different than the people saying that literature is in decline because people are reading Dan Brown instead of Coetzee.

tko · Sep 25, 2012

I stopped reading "official" reviews years ago

Yeah, the nice way to put it is he's full of himself. I read a book a day when I was younger. I finally noticed that I had stopped caring, agreeing, and finally reading the reviews in newspapers. The only relevant reviews were on-line.

If you can imagine something just throwing out the book supplement every Sunday, even as he picks up his newest novel to read.

Every critic, after some point in time, becomes pretentious, an insiders review for the other critics. Meaningless, because it's a critiquing contest, where those who can't write, compete in the only area they're good at.

Of course, like any self-appointed keeper of the masses, he's worried that the lesser critics will lead us poor peasant people astray, assuming we don't have the intelligence to tell the difference between a good and a bad review.

But he's right. "Not everyone's opinions is worth the same." And his is on the bottom of my list.

Amadan · Sep 25, 2012

I think a professional critic can absolutely be good at what they do and have worthwhile things to say, and is probably better at expressing them and speaking in the language of literary criticism.

That does not mean that the amateur opinions of people who just wax enthusiastic about books they like or trash books they don't are useless. A literary critic might say very intelligent things about a book without telling me anything about whether I'll actually enjoy reading it. Book bloggers might have tastes closer to mine, or they might focus on particular aspects that are of interest to me but not a professional critic.

Of course, Sir Stephen obviously thinks I'm a prole who can't actually distinguish between different viewpoints and whether or not an opinion is educated and informed. He's worried that I'll read an uneducated opinion and that will lead me to read a bad book, and being as uninformed as I am, I might even enjoy it without knowing better.

Saskatoonistan · Sep 25, 2012

I'd tweeted earlier that book blogging represents the democratization of book reviewing. I'm also of the opinion that newspapers are a dying medium and they've been the traditional home for book reviews. So I think part of this is a bit of a lament for a dying industry (Not sure what the circulation for The Independent is but Goodreads has 10 million members) but mostly a cheap shot at bloggers who are every bit as passionate about the written word as some guy wearing a monocle and a smoking jacket. Yep, there are crummy reviews but there are far more exceptional reviews that appear on blogs. At any rate, here's my little graphic that you can put on your blog. It's cheesy, but it sums up my point about so-called *real* book reviewers.

Drachen Jager · Sep 25, 2012

How to explain the 50 shades phenomenon and the rise of cult, terribly written literature like it? I think the rise of internet culture and blogging does a good job of explaining most of the phenomenon. I don't think it will destroy literature, but I do think it will hurt the overall quality level.

EMaree said:
Strange Chemistry editor Amanda had a great commenton Twitter about the line "In a normal year, you might read 20 novels.". She said 'Those book bloggers your'e slamming read WAY more'.

That's a specious argument. Taxi drivers drive WAY more than I do, it doesn't stop most of them from being terrible drivers. Simple exposure does not equal expertise, nor does it somehow push good taste into the brain.

I'm not 100% against book blogging, unlike the judge, but I do agree it has done more than anything else to lower collective brows around the world when it comes to the written word.

Old Hack · Sep 25, 2012

EMaree said:
What a prick.

You might not agree with him, but is that good enough reason to call him names? And isn't that a somewhat lazy way to express your disagreement?

I think you can do better, I really do.

Saskatoonistan · Sep 25, 2012

How to explain, then, pulp fiction in the 1940's & 1950's? The 50 Shades phenomenon is just one in a continuation of phenomenons. The larger issue here is who gets to decide what is "good" and what isn't? I think bloggers are a critical element in the new publishing world - I think a lot of people are racing to catch up with what social networking means when it comes to book reviews. This is word of mouth - that's what blogging is. And there are good bloggers as well as lousy ones. True story: I first heard about A Monster Calls by Patrick Ness via a blogger. Way WAYYY before it was ever reviewed in a news paper. I'd also learned of 50 Shades way before it hit critical mass in the mainstream media via a blogger. Funny that. One book that some would describe as being lowbrow and another that is critically acclaimed. All from a blogger.

Keyan · Sep 25, 2012

I find professional reviewers worse than useless in determining what I want to read... with perhaps the exception of NPR, where they actually discuss the book with the author. Otherwise, it gives me the opinion of a discerning literary reader, which I'm not.

What I read are Amazon reviews - not for the stars, but for what they liked and what they didn't. In the process, I get a far better idea of the book than a single review by a professional reviewer.

I want reviews and recommendations from people with the same reading tastes as me. If it was a book blogger, I'd follow their blog, and I wouldn't care if they wrote it sitting in traffic on their i-phone.

A review is not a work of art (unless it is, of course - there's one book reviewer I read because I *love* her reviews even if I don't want to read the same books). It just tells me whether it's the kind of book I want to read.

EMaree · Sep 25, 2012

My apologies, Old Hack.

Amadan · Sep 25, 2012

Drachen Jager said:
I'm not 100% against book blogging, unlike the judge, but I do agree it has done more than anything else to lower collective brows around the world when it comes to the written word.

This is nonsense. How exactly does that work? Book bloggers praise books that don't deserve it and then everyone lemming-like reads them?

Man Booker Prize judge lashes out at book bloggers

a demon for tea

Stand in the Place Where You Live

a demon for tea

Stand in the Place Where You Live

Stealing your twiglets.

Stand in the Place Where You Live

Stand in the Place Where You Live

a demon for tea

empty-nester!

Stand in the Place Where You Live

a demon for tea

volitare nequeo

just thanks fore everything

Still the wrong side of Saskatoon

Professor of applied misanthropy

Such a nasty woman

Still the wrong side of Saskatoon

ubiquitous

a demon for tea