NY Times Article: Books and Blogs

On the whole, this New York Times article does well at chronicling the loss of print outlets for book reviews and the rise of online attention to books in the form of blogs. They have quotes from many litbloggers, from Ed to Mark and more. David L. Ulin concedes the advantages of blogs. But then, most of the way through the article, NYTBR editor Sam Tanenhaus is quoted, and it's all downhill from there:

"While I’m all for the literary bloggers, and I think the more people that write about books the better, they’re not necessarily as regionally focused as knowledgeable, experienced long-term editors in the South or Midwest or anywhere where the most important writers come from."

1. We're making progress - at least he acknowledges that he's "all for" "literary" bloggers (not anyone who's not literary), even if it's only in a dependent clause, and even if the clause is only a rhetorical concession that will inevitably precede another lame smack-down.

2. Why would regional specificity be the criteria for a good blogger? Isn't that incredibly arbitrary?

3. Apparently there are "certain regions" where the "most important writers come from" and if you aren't from there, you really shouldn't write about books or write books. Seriously?

4. He has to be joking that bloggers don't have regional specificity. Of course I'm tied to LA - all my writer friends are here, the people I interview are often from LA, the readings I go to are obviously in LA, and I know (and offer online attention to) far more many struggling first-book-coming-out writers in LA than elsewhere.

5. Why are bloggers automatically not knowledgeable, experienced or long-term? Just because the medium is new doesn't mean we just started reading and evaluating books five years ago.

Comments

[Dean]

I don't know why you U.S. litbloggers are making such a stink when you're attacked by literary pundits of Sam Tanenhaus' ilk.

If he's got it in for your, it's because he feels threatened.

The recent spate of lit page adjustments in the U.S., and the falling income being experienced by all newspapers in Australia and the U.S. except for Rupert Murdoch's New York Post, indicates that there is a permanent adjustment going on.

Tanenhaus is not happy because his managers are not happy. Simple.

In Australia, the Sydney Morning Herald literary critic Susan Wyndham has been operating a blog for months. She also visits local lit bloggers, and even comments from time to time. She's engaging with the new medium in an intelligent manner.

But you wouldn't know about this development because of your parochialism. The Internet is a global phenomenon. Further, the Sydney Morning Herald is as good as, if not better than, any U.S. broadsheet.

You wouldn't know about it, though. Ed does, and the guys at the Literary Saloon, who frequent antipodean websites in their insatiable search for good content.

Maybe if you suggested to Tanenhaus that he emulate Wyndham, he would please all parties: the newspaper's readers AND the litbloggers. And the managers.

It's all very well to engage in spirited polemic. I'm all for it. But there may be viable alternatives that neither side in this debate has yet canvassed.

[William]

Recently, I visited a great coupons site named Couponalbum.com where I find my favorite books at most discounted prices from many major stores......!!