Washingtonpost.com: Live Online

Washington Post Book World Senior Editor Michael Dirda took your questions and comments Thursday, March 6 at 2 p.m. concerning literature, books and the joys of reading.

This Week's Topic: What do you want from a book review and do you think you get it?

Each week Dirda's name appears -- in unmistakably big letters -- on page 15 of The Post's Book World section. If he's not reviewing a hefty literary biography or an ambitious new novel, he's likely to be turning out one of his idiosyncratic essays or describing his travels to, say, a P.G. Wodehouse Convention. Although he earned a Ph.D. in comparative literature from Cornell, Dirda has somehow managed to retain a myopic 12-year-old's passion for reading. He particularly enjoys comic novels, intellectual history, locked-room mysteries, innovative fiction of all sorts -- just the sort of range you'd expect from a Pulitzer Prize winner in criticism (1993).

These days, Dirda says he still spends inordinate amounts of time mourning his lost youth, listening to music (Glenn Gould, Ella Fitzgerald, Diana Krall, The Tallis Scholars), and daydreaming ("my only real hobby"). He claims that the happiest hours of his week are spent sitting in front of a computer, working. In the fall of 2000 Indiana University Press published "Readings: Essays and Literary Entertainments," a selection from Dirda's Book World columns. He hopes to bring out a companion volume soon.

Dirda joined The Post in 1978, having grown up in the working-class steel town of Lorain, Ohio and graduated with highest honors in English from Oberlin College. His favorite writers are Stendhal, Chekhov, Jane Austen, Evelyn Waugh, T.S. Eliot, Nabokov, John Dickson Carr, Joseph Mitchell and Jack Vance. He thinks the greatest novel of all time is either Murasaki Shikubu's "The Tale of Genji" or Proust's "A la recherche du temps perdu." In a just world he would own Watteau's painting "The Embarkation for Cythera." He'd also like to spend six months in Florida writing a book that would become a runaway best seller, a critical success, and the hottest cinematic property of the year. A guy can daydream, right?

The transcript follows.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.

Paradise Paved: Today's topic is a subtle one: I don't know. I'm basically satisfied with the reviews I read. You said a literature student should "micro-intensely" study only a few authors or subjects -- why? Won't that make them kind of geeky? Thank you.

Michael Dirda: Welcome to Dirda on Books! As we ponder, weak and weary, this drizzly afternoon, our attention is directed to--yes--book reviewing. For the next hour we'll discuss literature, publishing, books, whatever, but with particular attention paid to reviewing, its nature, purpose and pitfalls.
So on with the show!

Actually, what I said was a student should read as widely as possible, then narrow his gaze to the intense study of a few works. To understand literatue even a little, you need to gain some familiarity with its range and variety. Still there's no substitute for actually taking a poem apart, studying how a novel works, bringing to bear every analytic skill you possess to figure out how a book is put together. This is the method of Louis Aggasiz--better to know one fish well than a hundred only superficially.

Venus: What I want from a book review: a witty, intelligent, engaging analysis of the book; evidence that the reviewer actually read the book in question, and wrote the review while s/he was sober.

What I don’t want from a book review: a synopsis of the plot; a political diatribe; personal attacks or cheap attempts at retribution; gratuitous information about the reviewer (“When I was at the Madeira School and having cucumber sandwiches with Kay Graham’s great-niece...”); a futile attempt to pontificate or show off how much he knows (sorry, it’s almost always a he, unless it’s Camille Paglia)

Do I ever get what I want from a book review? Hardly. The act of reading a book review ought not to feel like punishment or a chore. Reviews of poetry are, for some reason, the worst. My favorite place to read book reviews is the New York Review of Books. Oh, and your weekly column, of course.

Michael Dirda: There's nothing much to argue with here, though I would temper some of your judgments. You do need to give some sense of a novel's plot, without ruining the story. And I think that a live voice on the page, however achieved, is essential too. The reviews I like to read are by favorite reviewers, whose sound or style appeals to me. I also think it important for a reviewer to place a book in context, to compare it to other books by the author or other works on the same subject. Most of all,though, I do think of reviews as a kind of intellectual entertainment--they need to be fun to read, whether by being deeply learned or deliciously written.

Omaha, Neb.: Hi, I'd like your opinion on JG Ballard's view of the function of fiction. He states, "I believe that if it were possible to scrap the whole of existing literature... to be forced to begin again... all writers would find themselves inevitably producing something very close to SF." And that "no other form of fiction has the vocabulary of ideas and images to deal with the present, let alone the future."
Thanks!

Michael Dirda: Hmmm. This sounds like 1960s Ballard to me. Obviously, there's some truth here--many of our most admired mainstream writers have borrowed from the tropes of sf in dealing with a world of constant change and future shock. Of course, you must also remember that Ballard said that he wasn't interested in outer space, but in inner space--and indeed his own fiction, for all the abandoned swimming pools and low-flying aircraft, is intensely psychological rather than technological in its character.

Richmond, Va.: Just wanted to say in response to something said a couple of weeks ago that they are still (or again) putting out hardcover Oxford World Classics.

Michael Dirda: Are they? Oh yes, now I do remember seeing some. But they seemed clunkier, less elegant, somehow. Or am I deluded?

Mays Landing, N.J.: Who wrote the sci-fi novels about the hunting of huge galactic jellyfish-like creatures called "Peteys?" I would appreciate learning the titles of those works, too. I recall that you reviewed one of these books favorably years ago. Thank you.

Michael Dirda: I, M. Dirda, reviewed this book? Well, my memory really is going. This sounds very familiar and I'll probably be embarassed to learn that it's Jack Vance or Alfred Bester but I just don't remember. Sci-fi girl, any help?

Reinbeck, Iowa: From time to time, you have mentioned in passing general Web sites that might be of interest to bibliophiles like myself. Could you reinterate the list? Sites can be about anything -- general interest, fiction, nonfiction, classics, science fiction, romance, antique books, collecting, libraries, etc. Obviously, the well-rounded "Dirda On Books" always tops the list.

Michael Dirda: I've mentioned various web sites, but I actually haven't listed those of particular interest to bibliophiles. You might start with some of the more intense sodalities: the DorothyL group (Dorothy Sayers) or fictionmags.com that focuses on magazine fiction from the 1890s through the 1950s. Or any of the various sodalities associated with science fiction or favorite authors. Find one active site and it will lead you to others. I myself no longer follow the web activities of even favorite groups: The internet just gobbles up time.

Washington, D.C.: Hello Michael -- Interesting topic. I heard you speak once about book reviewing and you said that you generally prefer to write reviews about books you like than spending time and space writing about how bad a book is. The idea, which I agree with, is: why bother writing about books that aren't worth reading, when you can point readers to a good book. Can you talk more about this?

Michael Dirda: Well, sometimes you do need to warn people that a noted or best selling author has produced a dud. But the piece should be short, no matter how sour. The sad thing is that people do follow the best seller lists and read books that are often second rate because they know no better. A warning can help. Also, it's a lot easier and more fun to write critical or even savage pieces. But probably bad for the character. As I said, I prefer to cheerlead for the good and the neglected.

Fort Lauderdale, Fla.: Michael,
I think a well-turned book review can be one of the highest forms of essay writing and, certainly, journalism. Who are some of the reviewers, even long forgotten ones, you admired when you were contemplating the trade?

Michael Dirda: Let's make this reviewers, in general, whether of books, movies or music: Randall Jarrell, Edmund Wilson, Virgil Thomson, James Agee, Cyril Connolly, John Updike, George Orwell, Mary McCarthy, Clifton Fadiman, Pauline Kael, V.S. Pritchett, Ezra Pound, T.S. Eliot, W.H. Auden.

Up in the New York state: What is your opinion of novelists who review their peers? I'm thinking of the notorious Dale Peck review of Rick Moody's recent memoir in the New Republic. It began with something like "Rick Moody is the worst writer of his generation" and then proceeded to excoriate not only Moody but Joyce, Pynchon and DeLillo. Is this refreshing or just mean-spirited?

Michael Dirda: It's mostly stupid. But some people, usually the young, figure that the way to make their rep is to challenge established reputations. With few exceptions, these pieces sound zingy at the time, but fade before long and if reread sound like self-portraits in vanity: Look at me! I'm thumbing my nose at a famous writer.
There are exceptions--but even Dwight MacDonald's famous slash and burn of James Gould Cozzens doesn't hold up very well. Cozzens was clearly a better writer than MacDonald gave him credit for, though a clunky stylist at times.
The proper attitude of the critic was described by Schopenhauer: One should stand before works of art and wait until they speak to us.

Takoma Park, Md.: Virginia Woolf did some pretty good reviewing too, didn't she?

Michael Dirda: Virginia Woolf? That name has a familiar ring.
Yes, Virginia did write splendid reviews, and I should have included her on my list. Sometimes, though, she could get a little too impressionistic for my taste, though I feel nothing but awe at the range of her reading.

Re: galactic jellyfish called peteys: Pirates of the Universe, by Terry Bisson

Michael Dirda: Thanks. I didn't review this, though I 've met Bisson and admire some of his other work, such as the famous story "Bears Discover Fire."

Washington, D.C.: Mr. Dirda --

No flattery intended, but I think you set a very high bar for other reviewers.

In the past, you have outlined what you view as the essential elements of a proper book review, including things such as citing characteristic excerpts from the book to give review readers a sense of whether they might like the book. Could you set out those elements again to give us a context for this discussion?

For my part, especially in the review of lesser known authors, I would find it helpful if the reviewer compared or contrasted the style or essence of the work to other more familiar or classic works.

Thanks.

Michael Dirda: I've already stated some of my principles, though I've violated all of them on occasion. A reviewer needs to discuss the book written (not the one he wishes the author had written instead), tell enough of the plot to convey the books flavor, quote a bit to show the author's style (assertion is not proof, one needs examples), compare a book to earlier works by the author or other books in the field, give a sense of what you feel is successful and what not, and do it all with a certain pizzazz. I like to vary my reviews--in some, where the author possesses a terrific style, I quote a lot; in others, I will stick with my own voice. Sometimes I like the piece to buckle--the lead and the kicker somehow fitting together. Other times I rev up my style a bit, just for fun; but sometimes I'll stay sober and factual. In other words, I look at each book individually and ask myself: How best can I convey the essence of this author, this work? And how can I do it so that it's fun for me to write?

Washington, D.C.: I was surprised you didn't include Martin Amis as a reviewer you respect.

Michael Dirda: I do admire Amis as a reviewer, but the question asked about reviewers that influenced me in my--sigh--younger days, when I was, so to speak, starting out. Though I never started out to be a book reviewer: I intended to be a great scholar of comparative literature, teaching at Princeton, carrying on the work of Erich Auerbach and E.R. Curtius.

Washington, D.C.: Can I make a book recommendation -- English Passengers by Matthew Kneale. Don't know if you have read or reviewed it, but I'm loving every page.

Michael Dirda: Thanks

Washington, D.C.: For a book review, I would like a general overview of what the book is about (less than an actual summary) and why the reviewer did or did not like the book. Though this sounds simple enough, it's actually pretty difficult without giving away too many surprises.

The why is most important because sometimes people are looking for action rather than beautiful language or vice versa.

Maybe I have different tastes, but there are certain books which received heaps of praise but for the life of me, I can't figure out why. (e.g., Corrections).

Michael Dirda: I don't think liking a book lies at the heart of reviewing. The key is accurate description--what is there on the page? The reader can then decide whether this is the sort of book he or she likes. My besetting fault as a reviewer is that I try to make everything I write lively and fun and so sometimes make merely good books sound better than they are.

My demands: The thing I most want to learn from a review is whether the book is worth reading, and why. As one of the earlier posters noted, much of what goes into reviews has nothing to do with the book in question and is just a way for the reviewer to fill up the 800 or so words without having to engage in actual criticism of the text. A little honesty from reviewers, particularly if they know the author or have an axe to grind, would also be appreciated.

Michael Dirda: At newspapers, we actively try to avoid books being reviewed by friends of the author or people who have it in for him or her. ONce I called up a guy to review a book and when I told him the author he said, slowly: "I've been waiting 20 years for a chance to review something by that bastard." He had to keep waiting.

College Park, Md.: Hope you or someone in the forum can help out. The personality cults of the 20th century -- Stalin, Mao, Mussolini, Hitler, in particular -- dictated with "iron hand," a quality that many people both appreciated and respected. Many would disagree, but I find it fascinating how these men ruled their people ruthlessly, yet they in retrospect actually appreciated such "law and order" (just witness the recent celebration of Stalin in Russia).

Are there any good critical biographies or "social histories" of Stalin and Mussolini that try to uncover not only the personality, but also the affect it had within the society. What kind of people were these dictators, and what kind of society would appreciate mass-murder and state terrorism? I once read an interesting apect of their background: both Mussolini and Stalin began in leftist/socialist entities but were seen by their peers as somewhat thick-necked, aggressive and not particularly bright or sharp; they were enforcers, they were opportunists. I wonder if similar comaprisons will be done with Milosevic and Saddam Hussein in their posthumous biographies.

Thanks for entertaining my long-winded post.

Michael Dirda: There are lots of biographies of these people, and most of them would deal with the love-hate paradox of dictatorship. Robert Conquest, Ian Kershaw, Mack Knox, are some writers you might look at.

Re Book Reviews: Last week I requested that we discuss book reviews. I’d like to tell you what got me interested in the subject.

A while back I bought “Portrait of an Explorer: Hiram Bingham, Discoverer of Machu Picchu” as a remaindered book. I hadn’t read a review, but the book was cheap, had nice photos, and sounded interesting. It turned out to be a biography of the author’s father, who was the son and grandson of missionaries in Hawaii, who financially went from rags to riches by marrying well, and who ultimately became a US Senator as well as discoverer of Machu Picchu. The author focused somewhat on his dad’s scramble to “make it” in 19th century America. He told the family story behind the public history. I thoroughly enjoyed the entire book. My interest never flagged once.

Later I came across a New York Times review by William Buckley that panned.the book. I couldn’t find the interview on the internet; otherwise I would quote it exactly, but I remember it saying something like that Buckley couldn’t figure out why it had even been written. As I remember, he had nothing good to say about it. I was shocked. The first thing I thought was, no wonder that book was remaindered. No one who read that review would want to buy the book. No wonder it is now out of print.

But I liked it! And Buckley did the readers of the New York Times Book Review a disservice by not figuring out that there was a group of readers who would enjoy this biography.

Today, while searching unsuccessfully on the internet for the review, I came across the author’s obituary. He is described as a “once-radical intellectual”, son of a conservative congressman, who came of age in the 20s as a Republican but got into militant radical politics in the 30’s and then settled down as a New Deal Democrat in the 40’s.

Maybe the ultraconservative Buckley should’t have been asked to review a book by a man who rejected his father’s conservative ideology?

Do people like Buckley have excessive power in the book review field? If a review is unfair, can the paper ask someone else to review the book?

Michael Dirda: Lots of points here. In principle, Buckley should have excused himself if he felt a personal animus or conflict of interest. Reviewers and readers DO disagree: Many of the books on the best seller list received negative or luke-warm notices. Buckley might have applied more sophisticated critical judgment than you--or you than he. It is, I admit, disconcerting though when professional critics disagree and this happens all the time. One of the reasons there are regular reviewers is so that readers can learn their tastes and judge their judgments accordingly.

Alexandria, Va.: What I want from a book review: First, I want to know why this book is important. Whether it's non-fiction or fiction, I want the reviewer to put the work and the author into some sort of context. Is it a ground-breaking work that explores new territory or is it just a more thorough treatment of ideas that are already out there, is it worthwhile only for the information itself or also for the style of writing, those are the questions I want answered.

Beyond that, I want some discussion of the ideas themselves, and enough actual quotes from the book to get some sense of the author's style.

Michael Dirda: We're on the same wave length.

Richmond, Va.: No, the Oxford World Classics are not clunky in the least. They are quite small with pastel covers and have tiny print.

Michael Dirda: Yes. But they didn't seem as attractive--take off the dust jackets--as the older ones. The blue covers, as I recall, were a rougher cloth and just seemed a bit chintzy.

Arlington, Va.: To me book reviews are like movie reviews. I go with people who I know have similar tastes in genre and styles. So, I tend to read the same reviewers over and over again. What I really find helpful are interviews with authors. Especially those who are first time writers or just not well known. Most of the books that I have read the past couple of years have come that route. If a person gives a really intersting interview, then they probably write really good books. (Yes, I admit it. Brian Lamb's Book Notes on C-Span, 8:00 on Sunday nights, has become one of my favorite shows.) Every book that I have picked up after seeing the interviews have been top notch.

Michael Dirda: See my previous response. It's interesting that interviews do make a difference--I hope I"ll be invited to Brian Lamb's show when my book comes out in October.

Pentagon, Arlington, Va.: Am I the only one who really only wants a book review to be practical. I just want to be able to determine if I will like the book enough to spend the money.

Michael Dirda: Yes, you are the only one.

Arlington, Va.: On today's topic- personally, I read book reviews not only to discover what the critics think but also to see if this is a type of book I would actually go out buy. I need a frame of reference that includes comparisons with other authors or other books by the same author as well as the "normal" critics' stuff.

Michael Dirda: THe question of buying is one we haven't really addressed. Because reviewers get the books for free, they seldom reflect that the book costs $25 or more and that what they say can lead to a fair outlay of cash. Perhaps we wouldn't be so blithe and enthusiastic about so many titles, if we had to pay full price for each of them.

Silver Spring, Md.: Don't forget Robertson Davies among the best reviewers, either.

Michael Dirda: Nope. I was just looking at his Enthusiasms collection the other day. Such a nice carpet-slippers-before-the-fire prose.

Columbia, MD: When I think of the books I would never have read without some of the folks mentioned (Edmund Wilson, Woolf, Auden, M. Dirda, and even once encountered reviewers whose reviews guided me to a book I treasure), I'm humbled. Thank you on behalf of your tribe for the Blue Flower, the Golden Compass and other books I've enjoyed too numerous to list

Michael Dirda: Thanks.

Charlotte, N.C.: I wonder about the book review equivalent of some forms of movie review, i.e., "it's good for what it is." Roger Ebert does this a lot. He'll write a favorable review of a movie that doesn't aspire to be A Great Film but just a fun diversion for an afteroon. If the movie "knows" that's what it is (that is, the film-maker doesn't have pretentions otherwise) and, within that context, is, in fact, a fun diversion, it's a good movie. Are there ever book reviews written within the framework of "it's Joan Collins, for heaven's sake, but it's perfect Joan Collins!"

Michael Dirda: Sure. One judges a thriller by thriller standards, not by those of Ulysses or Madame Bovary. The capers of Donald Westlake fit your description, though one or two of his books are more than just perfectly crafted entertainment machines.

Austin, Tex.: Will you be going on a tour to promote your new book when it's published (I think you said this fall)? Hope you'll put Austin on your list!

Michael Dirda: What's a good bookstore in Austin? Have them invite me. Actually, I've long wanted to write about Austin--the writers, the Harry Ransom Center, etc. etc. so maybe I"ll get there.

Santa Fe, N.M.: I've been home all week with a sick child and am looking for something entertaining and comforting to read. Any suggestions? Thank you.

Michael Dirda: Cold Comfort Farm, by Stella Gibbons.

Washington, D.C.: Whether a book is worth reading or not has always been more important to me than whether a book is worth buying. Is one a critique and the other a review?

Michael Dirda: Criticism deals with books the audience has or might have already read; reviews introduce books to the world. Much of the time the reviewer can't dig as deeply as he'd like into a book's character--because it will mean revealing too much of the story. How can you analyze in depth The Great Gatsby if you can't mention that Gatsby is murdered in the end? Oops. Hope you've all read the book.

Washington, D.C.: Michael -- Can you talk a bit about how Book World chooses reviewers, i.e. how they match a reviewer to a book?

Michael Dirda: It's an arcane process, involving the Tarot, the Vulcan mind-meld, and gut instinct. In truth, we talk about the books in a meeting and suggest reviewers who seem appropriate. An editor calls, makes sure there's no conflict, and that's that. THe hard part is finding a reviewer with a bit of spin.

Austin, Tex.: Book People is the main independent in town. I'll definitely call them about your coming. Maybe you could do a talk at the Ransom Center as well. I worked there as a college student years ago, and their collection is just fabulous, plus all of the strange author memorabilia they have: I'll never forget seeing the books from Anne Sexton's library with their ringed watermarks from her drinking glasses, and the case with locks of hair from the Romantic poets (very faded).

Michael Dirda: Neat.

Burke, Va.: Could you reccomend me some books by German authors who had to flee Germany or go into internal exile. Are Adorno and Arent the ones I should look for?

Michael Dirda: You could try Thomas Mann, Hermann Broch, Bertolt Brecht, or among scholars Auerbach, Curtius, Leo Spitzer, and those you mention. There are books on the German authors of the '30s who went into exile.

Annapolis, Md.: Does Book World ever use reviewers who are educated, sophisticated readers as opposed to well-known authors or reviewers?

Michael Dirda: Sometimes. But you'd have to have clips.
And that concludes our program for today. Thanks for checking in. Do tell your friends. And till next week, keep reading!

| |



	<img SRC="washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/redesign/adv_discusssion.htm" width=125 height=110 border=0>