Book reviewing may seem in reasonable health. But the authority of critics is being undermined by a raucous blogging culture and an increasingly commercial publishing industry. Literary journalism needs to get better if it is to survive
In America in recent months, there has been an outbreak of agonising about the state of book reviewing. Several long articles—and one widely reviewed book: Faint Praise, by Gail Pool—have appeared proclaiming the genre to be if not moribund, then at least in a condition of semi-decrepitude. These concerns have been prompted, most immediately, by the slimming down of book review sections in the US print media. In the last few years, the books pages of most major US papers—as well as a host of smaller ones—have had their word counts slashed, their commissioning budgets cut and their staff downsized. Only the New York Times Book Review appears unscathed. But the issue goes deeper than this. At play are anxieties about the vitality of literary culture, the relationship between print and digital media, even the long-term survival of book-reading itself. Throughout its history, the book review has occupied an uncertain position in relation to the body of literature, being perceived, alternatively, as a nourishing agent and a pest. Growing fears for the genre's survival in the US have, at least, gone some way to resolving this issue. Most people agree that if people stop writing about books, books will be worse off.
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=9995