The Tyranny Of High Brow Reviewers
Some lengthy, rambling thoughts on reviewing:I don't have the pretention of being a particularly good book reviewer. I would like to think that I don't suck, but that's for you guys to decide. The Hotlist will receive its 500,000th visitor this week, and its 1,000,000th page will be viewed later this spring. So I guess I must be doing something right... Way back when, SFF book reviews meant high brow, intellectual, pretentious, I-have-a-pole-up-my-ass kind of thing. Most of the time, it wasn't even about the novel or work being put under the microscope. Nope, it felt more like it was about the reviewer himself, pontificating and showing how much he enjoyed hearing themselves talk. Yes, I guess we're back to the mental masturbation argument once again... The problem with a lot of the newer SFF bloggers out there is that they have no voice. You read their stuff, and it feels as though they are afraid to offer their honest opinion... Instead of being forced to read John Clute and his ilk (which we had no choice to do for years and years and years), fans now have the luxury to go where they please. Some come here, while many others visit a panoply of blogs, websites, fanzines, etc... Coverage in print media is on the decline, and I am aware that many of the better known and older book reviewers feel that people like me are responsible for pulling the carpet from under them. If you ask me, their "high brow" approach is the reason why. Provided with a more "user friendly" alternative, fans have left them to follow other reviewers who are as passionate as they are, and who don't talk down to them.
It is all there. It is the sort of post where you don't know where to begin so these are just a couple of choice snippets.
It is all there. It is the sort of post where you don't know where to begin so these are just a couple of choice snippets.