"Some reviews have to be "bad" precisely because the work they're evaluating is--no other way to put it--bad".
------Okey Ndibe.
And some reviews have to be bad precisely because the authors of the works they are evaluating are in the bad books of the circles to which they belong to. A reviewer in an unguarded moment told me in a private chat in Port Harcourt last year that "I write according to the dictates of my politics" and ever since, he has been posting his "unbiased" reviews all over the Internet.
------CAO.
From: Okey Ndibe <okndibe@yahoo.com>
To: "Ederi@yahoogroups.com" <Ederi@yahoogroups.com>; Ikhide <xokigbo@yahoo.com>; "USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com" <USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2012 1:07 AM
Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: [Ederi] Arthur Krystal: Should Writers Reply to Reviewers?
--Obiwu has framed the question. Some reviews have to be "bad" precisely because the work they're evaluating is--no other way to put it--bad.Some years ago, Dale Peck famoulsy began a review of a so-called memoir by Rick Moody with this bracing sentence: "Rick Moody is the worst writer of his generation." Here's the full review: http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/the-moody-blues. And that opening sentence is one of the kinder ones in that review. But guess what? I went to the bookstore a few days later and read Moody's book that provoked that caustic, barbed dismissal. After reading three or four pages, I left with the impression that Dale Peck deserved a prize and a nice bottle of wine (or else a visit to what our people call psychia) for wading through the Moodian confection of nonsense.Peck's review raised some (bad) writers' hackles. A lot of these writers--many of them Moody-like or Moody-wanna-be's--pecked at Peck. But as VS Naipaul might say, the book (and the review) is what it is.ON
From: Obiwu <obiwu@yahoo.com>
To: Ikhide <xokigbo@yahoo.com>; USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com; Ederi@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, April 2, 2012 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Ederi] Arthur Krystal: Should Writers Reply to Reviewers?
But is a bad review a badly written review, or a review that calls a bad work what it is?
From: Ikhide <xokigbo@yahoo.com>;
To: USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com <USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com>; Ederi@yahoogroups.com <Ederi@yahoogroups.com>;
Subject: [Ederi] Arthur Krystal: Should Writers Reply to Reviewers?
Sent: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 5:12:54 PM
"And while we're on the subject, let's put to rest another misconception: A bad review is not—I repeat, is not—better than no review at all. Where does such homiletic bunk come from? Yes, it's better to be indifferently noticed than completely neglected, but the law of diminishing returns kicks in once the reviewer begins to lord it over the book. And while a bad review will sell more books than no review at all, it will not sell many and certainly not enough to compensate the author for seeing his or her work publicly slighted or, worse, mangled."- IkhideStalk my blog at www.xokigbo.comFollow me on Twitter: @ikhideJoin me on Facebook: www.facebook.com/ikhide__._,_.___Recent Activity:.
__,_._,___
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment