<<<"shit" was my own word, in summing up what a
critic is saying about a book when he writes a damning
(well-argued or otherwise) piece:>>>
A reviewer's primary responsibility is to the reader, not the
writer, not the publisher. In fact, one of the best-written
reviews I've read panned Kevin Wignall's FOR THE DOGS (which
I'd read and liked very much.) The tone of Patrick Anderson's
review was, "Look, this didn't work for me, but it might be
worth checking out anyway." Anderson not only said he didn't
like the book, but conceded he was probably in the
minority.
That's not the same as doing a hatchet job on a book because
you want to show how cool you are. I've read too many of them
as well. But a thoughtful negative review might, if the
reviewer tells me what his qualms are, prompt me to actually
buy the book. As long as I have a filter for his opinions, I
can get a feel for whether I'd like the book or not.
Jim Winter
http://www.jamesrwinter.com
http://jamesrwinter.blogspot.com
winter-newsletter-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
--------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads.
Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for
free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/kqIolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
RARA-AVIS home page: http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rara-avis-l/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
rara-avis-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 14 Oct 2004 EDT