ŷ������

I read on one of the conventional critics�� opinions on book bloggers:

“Sir Peter Stothard has edited the Times Literary Supplement (TLS) for almost a decade and spent the past seven months reading an “unnatural�� 145 books on the search for this year’s Man Booker Prize. He has been left hugely critical over the decline in current standards of literary criticism, and says the rise of bloggers will leave the industry “worse off��.”Criticism needs confidence in the face of extraordinary external competition,�� the former editor of The Times says. “It is wonderful that there are so many blogs and websites devoted to books, but to be a critic is to be importantly different than those sharing their own taste�� Not everyone’s opinion is worth the same. 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.��

I totally disagree, and was happy to read .

"What blogs can give readers is a sense of trust that, in professional circles, only the biggest lit-crit names �� such as James Wood or Michiko Kakutani �� can attain: a “criticism with personality��. They are expressing opinions about books in particular, and literature in general, based on a particular life of reading, written in a critical but non-technical language."

Do you think book bloggers help or harm?

More opinions

I am on the side of Bloggers. They, for the most part, seem to have their minds open to new literary endeavors. While on the other hand, professional critics seem to have their heads up their arse(s), which makes it difficult to read.

Well, since I do some book reviewing myself () I guess it's no surprise I'm on the side of the bloggers. That said, my primary issue is with Stothard's dismissal of readability. Though I agree that there's more to reviewing a book than how entertaining it is (at least in any review I'm interested in), at the same time, dismissing it is promoting the idea that literature is something that only "special" people can comment on, with is intensely elitist. There's a reason I ignore literary awards.

I'm a blogger, but first and foremost I'm a reader. I've never paid any attention to book critics, because I think I'm intelligent enough to form my own opinion. If a blurb speaks to me, I'm interested.

And as a blogger, especially one who will gladly read books by self-published authors, including debut novels, I think that I and folks like me provide a valuable service to authors big and small. I think fellow readers are possibly more likely to pick up a book recommended by bloggers versus one touted by book critics.

I think that most bloggers don't simply judge a book by its entertainment value, but dig deeper into the plot structure, the writing itself and the characterizations within. I also think that bloggers bring a wider variety to the table as far as background is concerned. We come from all walks of life, much like the people who purchase the books we blog about. I find it rather small-minded to presume that one has to have a Journalism or English Lit degree to properly review a book.

Paul wrote: "I am on the side of Bloggers. They for the most part, seem to have their minds open to new literary endeavors. While on the other hand, professional critics seem to have their heads up their arse(s..."

Lol, heads up their arse -- indeed!Would love for you to copy this comment on my blog :)

Steven wrote: "Well, since I do some book reviewing myself () I guess it's no surprise I'm on the side of the bloggers. That said, my primary issue is with Stothard's dismissal of readability..."

Agree that readability is important when it comes to books. I also know that some of the most frontier-breaking work is not easily readable, but as long as the blogger has an opinion, I don't see why any critic should discount it. Those who would read books with low readability won't stop doing so because of a blogger.

Sandra wrote: "I'm a blogger, but first and foremost I'm a reader. I've never paid any attention to book critics, because I think I'm intelligent enough to form my own opinion. If a blurb speaks to me, I'm intere..."

I also think that bloggers bring a wider variety to the table as far as background is concerned. We come from all walks of life, much like the people who purchase the books we blog about: I couldn't agree more. Would love to have this comment copied to my original blog post, if you don't mind :)

As a rule, Ill take the reviews of bloggers any day. My only criticism of bloggers is that the reader giving the review, because of a heavy reading load, will sometimes review a book witout thoroughly reading it.

Honestly I would say the bloggers seem to have a view that is closer to mine than the actual critics. I will also say that I don't pay any real attention to either critics or bloggers. I read what I find interesting.

I wrote this same kind of comment on Renee Pawlish's blog, where she posted the same comment from Stothard: the elistist attitude of the established mass-media book critics toward the independent blogger comes from the same place as the commercial publishers' attitude toward the independent author. It's snobbery, and it's protective of their own interests. They have to maintain the myth of their own superiority in taste, discrimination and discernment.

It's a case of the Emperor's New Clothes, don't you think?

love too--what's the address?

D. wrote: "Paul wrote: "I am on the side of Bloggers. They for the most part, seem to have their minds open to new literary endeavors. While on the other hand, professional critics seem to have their heads up..."

D. wrote: "Paul wrote: "I am on the side of Bloggers. They for the most part, seem to have their minds open to new literary endeavors. While on the other hand, professional critics seem to have their heads up..."

Okay ... it's posted. Thanks

I think bloggers are amazing and I've been seriously impressed by the quality of their reviews and professionalism. They take great pride over the design of their blogs and it's always a pleasure working with them.

A big thanks to all the bloggers I've contacted so far and who have provided detailed, honest and clear reviews, which have all helping to improve my writing and provide readers with a precise and truthful review.

Paul wrote: "D. wrote: "Paul wrote: "I am on the side of Bloggers. They for the most part, seem to have their minds open to new literary endeavors. While on the other hand, professional critics seem to have the..."

Thanks for the post -- if you meant to leave a link, it didn't come through, only a number and something about a book cover -- just a heads up!

Michael wrote: "I think bloggers are amazing and I've been seriously impressed by the quality of their reviews and professionalism. They take great pride over the design of their blogs and it's always a pleasure ..."

Thanks for this comment, Michael, and I too believe honest, unbiased blog reviews go a long way in helping a writer improve his craft. WOuld love to have this comment copied to my original blog post:

I just cut and pasted what I posted on ŷ������. Nothing important.

In general, I think the blogging world, although I also blog and support it, have made far too many people feel they are experts on a subject and that whatever they say should be taken as fact. Mostly because they've written it as fact, or that their opinion or view is the more correct, important, factual, believable, etc. There are as many, if not more bloggers however who are very professional although not officially in that capacity.

I am a reviewer and have had a site for some time . As commenters have said, I am not easy, as anyone reading my reviews will see but as an author and publisher also, I am fair. I've studied literary criticism numerous times on the way to a couple of degrees, but that is not the basis on which I review generally. I feel I've been successful largely because I do not concede to pressure to be liked, or widely followed or anything else. I have such a high volume of requests now, I've had to start set reading periods being overwhelmed by numbers.

Referencing the article, I do not believe bloggers vs. literary criticism will be detrimental to literature because I feel that's somewhat insulting to the average reader, especially serious ones. It's somewhat downing reader intelligence and their ability to deferentiate between objective criticism and a personal angle of piqué, as well as their being able to choose what they wish to read or not.

Sure, there does seem to be more observable trends and fads, where people blindly follow recommendations or "jump on the bandwagon" just for the hell of it or they personally like the blogger, or for whatever reason. But discerning readers can pick out those supplying "criticism with personality" if they want to.

D. wrote: "Would love to have this comment copied to my original blog post, if you don't mind"

Permission granted. :)

Sandra wrote: "D. wrote: "Would love to have this comment copied to my original blog post, if you don't mind"

Permission granted. :)"

Thanks Sandra! Could you paste the comment yourself, because if I copy and paste it, its authenticity may be questioned :)

Red wrote: "In general, I think the blogging world, although I also blog and support it, have made far too many people feel they are experts on a subject and that whatever they say should be taken as fact. Mos..."

I feel I've been successful largely because I do not concede to pressure to be liked, or widely followed or anything else: that is the right attitude, imho. I like how balanced and well thought out your comment is, just like your blog posts-- would like to request you to paste the comment on my original blog post here:

D. wrote: "Sandra wrote: "D. wrote: "Would love to have this comment copied to my original blog post, if you don't mind"

Permission granted. :)"

Thanks Sandra! Could you paste the comment yourself, because ..."

Sure. Where would you like me to post it?

Never mind, I posted it as a comment to your blog.

Scott wrote: "I wrote this same kind of comment on Renee Pawlish's blog, where she posted the same comment from Stothard: the elistist attitude of the established mass-media book critics toward the independent b..."

I agree with this in large part. There's a tacit assumption going on that a certain, elite group "owns" the idea of taste, and opinions expressed outside that realm lack discrimination. Blogging is an open medium - anyone can do it - so of course, reviews will vary. Some people (like myself) like to get into plotting, character, and so forth: I rate books and express whether I enjoyed them, but I try to provide information about what the experience of reading the book is like, so individual readers can come to their own decision about whether they might like it. I don't set myself up as the arbiter of good taste, only a thoughtful reader conveying an experience.

Other bloggers, of course, might read, write a review that covers what the book was about and whether they enjoyed it, and move on - and that's fine, too. Frankly, it's all good.

I'm more likely to look at a blogger's review than a professional critic because bloggers, in my experience, don't have to maintain their position (as Scott said) in the same way. The critic needs you think he (or she) is special in order to keep his job, the blogger just loves to read - who's going to give a critique more useful to a reader?

I just figure Stothard's the same kind of person who believes I'm a rube because I like bluegrass not opera.

Nora aka Diva wrote: "Honestly I would say the bloggers seem to have a view that is closer to mine than the actual critics. I will also say that I don't pay any real attention to either critics or bloggers. I read wha..."

BRAVO!

The issue could be looked at in two ways: One: Bloggers, while providing a very reliable opinion, might be biased against books that aren't the kind they read. I know, because I do it myself, as a reader (though I always add that the book isn't the kind I read). Hence it could be argued that a critic might have an unbiased opinion.

However, I've read quite a lot of 'critically acclaimed' books and they gave me a headache, so my current feeling is that professional critics might be deciding good books based on the complexity of the story. :P Anyway, I'd much rather read a good book anyday than a critically acclaimed one, and that says it all. :D

Jey wrote: "The issue could be looked at in two ways: One: Bloggers, while providing a very reliable opinion, might be biased against books that aren't the kind they read. I know, because I do it myself, as a ..."

Amen!

I'm always saddened to see "us vs them" type arguments, and especially around this topic it's especially frustrating. Book critics and book bloggers write for different purposes and for different audiences. One is about critical acclaim/academic merit and one is about popular taste. As others have noted, one is about craft and and artistry, and one is about enjoyability/entertainment value/readability. They are two distinct things. I don't read Roger Ebert's review of the latest escapist/mindless action flick - I ask my friends who enjoy the same sort of thing what they thought.


Ugh, just frustrates me to no end to hear comments like Stothard's. Book bloggers themselves are the first to say "we are readers, first and foremost, not literary critics" - and readers are entitled to their opinions! You don't have to have any special training to have an opinion and to know what it is! I like strawberries, I don't like brussel sprouts. It really is that easy! The fact that book bloggers go above and beyond to express their opinions rationally, thoughtfully, kindly, and with well-reasoned arguments/explanations is cause to celebrate them, not disparage them! Thank you book bloggers!

Terri, thanks for your comment here -- it is well-balanced and concise. Would you consider posting it on my blog post?

I don't know, Terri, I think there's a lot of bleed over between bloggers and critics: a lot of bloggers talk craft and artistry, a lot of critics deal with enjoyability (which is why I always like Ebert's reviews - he seems to really want to like what he's watching and have a good time). There are some different audiences at play, but lots of overlap.

Like Terri, I don't see why there isn't room for everyone. They serve different purposes. I appreciate how technology has allowed people to have a voice who might not get the chance otherwise.

Given that time has a way of weeding out those who are particularly dedicated to sharing their interests, I don't see a problem.

But, then, neither am I a professional critic who might feel his opinion is being drowned out in a rising sea of voices.

Jenn wrote: But, then, neither am I a professional critic who might feel his opinion is being drowned out in a rising sea of voices.

Under the elitism is an anxiety about a shifting model. If you're a paid expert and suddenly a lot of unpaid contributors emerge it represents a threat, and a sudden need to defend your position. The fact that people are even asking whether you might pay attention to a critic or a blogger, rather than of course dismissing the blogger and listening carefully to the critic, is threat to the critic's livelihood. I don't know how things will evolve, but any group that serves as a gatekeeper between content creators and consumers is under siege, due to the ability of creators to go around them. They still serve a purpose, but it's not clear if they will, moving forward.

I tend to like bloggers more these days. I have lost a bit of faith in the paid critic. Most books I have bought on the back of bloggers have been right on the money with their reviews. But then I follow bloggers who like the same books as me.