This is amazing. It’s from an interview with writer Shiela Kohler (who?) about the apparently dying institution of print book reviews and the emergence of lit blogs via Critical Mass (h/t to Conversational Reading for the link):
Q. Does your work get reviewed/discussed much on literary blogs? If so, how do those reviews compare with print reviews of your books?
A.Occasionally someone may mention my books in a blog. I believe the dangers of this indiscriminate reporting on books is that people who have no knowledge of literature can air their views as though they were of value and may influence readers. Critics may not always be right, of course, but at least they have read and studied literature, the great books, and have some outside knowledge to refer to when critiquing our work.
Sometimes a writer’s own words and arrogance will turn me off their work faster than any bad review of their work in print or – perish the thought – on some dirty blog rising from the fever swamps (like so much poison gas) to taint the discourse of the learned and influence the unwashed masses with his irrelevant and dangerous opinions. Sheesh.
James Brush is a teacher and writer who lives in Austin, TX. He tries to get outside as much as possible.
I wonder if Kohler has read and studied the internet, the great blogs, and has some outside knowledge to refer to when critiquing our work.
I’ve dedicated my life to studying the great blogs of history.
And by “blogs of history”, you mean ones that have been there three years? Just checking.
I’ve actually discovered a few four year old blogs on the ocean floor near Greece.
Actually, Michael Berube back in the day when he had his own blog made a very funny joke entry for his archive and you can check it out here.