Self-serving interest in the LBC

I have to admit that I think what attracted me most to the LBC-undertaking was not so much the opportunity to make others aware of books I think deserve more attention but rather to learn about books that I might otherwise have overlooked. I figured that with this bunch I'd be pointed to a good number of titles that wouldn't otherwise have caught my attention -- a self-serving idea that really thrilled (and continues to thrill) me.

What amazes me, however, is how eagerly I saw this as an opportunity of this sort. Running a book review site (the Complete Review, of which the Literary Saloon is the weblog) I constantly deal with new (and old books) -- and am always on the lookout for titles that might be of interest. I follow the book reviews (major dailies (domestic and international), TLS, NY Review of Books, London Review of Books, a few others), browse in bookstores at least twice a week, scour publishers-catalogs (online and off), always on the lookout. And yet despite my best efforts at staying on top of things, I'm constantly amazed by all the books I miss -- hence my interest in another way of learning about books that might be of interest. I know I'm missing a lot, because it happens all the time that I eventually do learn about a book of obvious interest to me by chance long after it appeared (in some obscure review, or because someone happens to mention it, etc.). And I'm fairly certain that there's a great, great deal more that passes me by unnoticed.

Running a book review site has helped somewhat in this regard because publicists and readers (and authors) inundate me with suggestions, a fraction of which are of actual interest (suggestions by readers -- who, unlike publicists and authors, have no real stake in what is covered at the site (and who are more attentive to the sort of books covered at the site) -- tend to be by far the most useful). But the actual yield of titles that I might otherwise not have picked up is relatively low.

With a relatively small number of suggestions (five every quarter) and from people whose opinions I think I can trust, the LBC seems a great way to add some more books to the mix. I'm fairly certain it will help in certain areas: contemporary American fiction by new authors is, for example, something I find very hard to get a handle on (and so generally just avoid) and I assume I'll be pushed towards more of that -- among much else.  And I take it that what is useful to me -- learning about these books -- will also be useful for our readers (so I don't feel too guilty about this opportunity that has been afforded me by being able to participate and partake ...).

I have to admit I also like the idea of having to read certain books. There's very little I force myself to read for the Complete Review -- I can do pretty much as I please there -- and I'm not a bookclub type, either (and long out of school with its required reading lists), so I'm glad to have that small additional push and not too onerous obligation (as well as then what I assume will be the opportunity to join in on the discussion of the title(s)). In the case of the current nominations, there was already one book I had a review copy of but had buried under piles of books that seemed more immediately appealing, and I'm glad that I was forced to pull it out and took the time to read it.

(I must note that, at least in this first go-around, the learn-about-more books aspect of the LBC has not been fully realized for me: aside from the title I nominated I had read one of the nominated titles ages ago, read other books by two of the other nominees (and had these two titles on my to-read lists, one scheduled for on-publication consumption, the other more vaguely in the future), and had a review copy of the final title sitting around already (though admittedly, as I mentioned, the LBC did get me to dig that out and read it). But I still believe I'll learn about some worthy books I'd otherwise have overlooked this way -- and I think our readers will as well.)

Comments

[Dan Wickett]

"(suggestions by readers -- who, unlike publicists and authors, have no real stake in what is covered at the site (and who are more attentive to the sort of books covered at the site) -- tend to be by far the most useful)"

Oh my gosh. That is the most dead-on thing I've read about having a website that reviews books! I can't believe the number of emails suggesting/offering titles that describe things that wouldn't be spotted at EWN in a hundred years.

Enjoy,

[mwb]

Ah, reviews not generated by the interests of the big publishers. I've become more and more disenchanted with the big publishers choices for contemporary fiction as a whole and how so many review publications over emphasize non-fiction (not that I don't read that too), big publishers only and tend to shift focus toward other media reviews (movies, CDs, etc.)

I kind of wish there was an independent print review magazine devoted to fiction published independent and small publishers.

I get a couple of music magazine whose primary focus is actually music and cover a lot of small, independent and self-produced music CDS. I'd love to see the same for literary fiction.

But I'm insane that way.

[Malcolm Campbell]

Even those media outlets who claim to be desperate for more rare, literary, and otherwise unnoticed books are notoriously difficult to get into.

Some, like my local newspaper, have no space available because they believe long reviews are better than multiple short ones. We're always told that if you can't interest a radio/tv interviewer in your book in 15 seconds, you're out of there. Reviewers might consider a similar strategy--do we really need thousand-word reviews of one or two books when 50-100 word reviews that don't wander with extraneously personal stuff about the interviewer's life and loves might: (a) get the message across much better, and (b) give publications the space they need to review more books per issue.

Random thoughts on a rainy Sunday morning in Georgia.

--Malcolm

[Lizzy]

Michael,

I first learned of Amelie Nothomb's existence from one of your reviews (of her first novel, I think). I read Fear and Trembling later and loved it.

I'm sure I'll find a gem or two here, too (although, so far, not impressed with Case Histories)...

It's just that it bugs me to come here and read the masthead proclaiming you all "the leading literary blogs." I mean, I always though of you as a real person, not one of those creeps... Heh.

Ok, well, no big deal. But it bugs me...