0
POPSPatron Removes Kids' Sex Book From Library--PW, 9/07 Karkos could have challenged the book through a formal process within the library and its board--and thus allowed the community to participate in deciding the fate of the book. Instead, she took it into her own hands to decide for everyone what is moral and what books should be available. By holding every copy of the book, she prevents anyone else from reading it and forming their own opinions. Regardless of the content of the book, Karkos' actions fly in the face of civil society and its crucial community aspects.
0
POPSBook Readers = Newspaper Readers, NY Sun, Jun 2007 Kirsch makes an interesting point: the book review section may not be in itself profitable for the newspaper, but surely the audience for the printed newspaper itself has a large overlap with those who read books. So the book section might keep readers loyal to the paper to a larger extent than the bean-counters realize.
0
POPSGender in NY Times book reviews, Women's Review, Nov 2004 Not quite as cool as the Guerrilla Girls feminist activist movement in visual art, but still a pretty interesting set of statistics. The article doubts the NYTBR's editor's defense. I wonder if the numbers bear him out. "McGrath offered three explanations for the unbalanced ratio for book authors: that "more books are written by men than women"; that he chooses books for review based on whether they are "worthy of review"; and that he chooses for review books that are "of interest to our readers." We told McGrath we had tried in vain to determine whether more books by men than by women are published, and we asked him to tell us where he had found that documentation. He did not reply."
1
POPSThe Ethics of Book Reviews, NY Sun, June 2007 Another quote I feel really demonstrates the issue: "Some of the most influential editors and writers in the country — including Sam Tanenhaus, the editor of the New York Times Book Review, and Francine Prose, a frequent reviewer for Harper's and other publications — pretty much shrugged off all of the ethical concerns that the NBCC survey raised. As Ms. Prose said, such questions stem from "a bogus idea about book reviewing" — the idea that a book review is like "a peer review panel of the FDA."" Unfortunately, in the last few paragraphs of the article, Mr Kirsch goes off on an ill-informed rant against blogging. It's really unfortunate that the "establishment" reviewers haven't, apparently, discovered the fascinating world of the quality litblog.
0
POPSWhen is a Review Not a Review? NY Observer 6/2007 Two interesting points here, on the purpose of reviews: 1. The National Book Critics Circle appears to think book reviews are a quid pro quo transaction between author and reviewer. This idea is nicely debunked by Adam Kirsch in the NY Sun (12 June 2007; see my clipmark). 2. Apparently reviews aren't intended to "review"; they're essays on the book, rather than thumbs up/down. I'll have to think about that; it's a broad statement, perhaps broader than originally intended?
Newest Clips
see Newest Clips
Latest Pops
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Tags
Print
Save
Turn on live update