headermask image

header image

Are Books \”News About the Culture?\”

On Oct. 4, Poynter.org published an interview by “Book Babes” Margo Hammond and Ellen Heltzel with the editor of the New York Times Book Review, Sam Tanenhaus. During that conversation, Tanenhaus said, “We’re going to treat books not as literary artifacts but as news about the culture.”

Expanding on that point, Hammond wrote, “To me, that means that the selection of what is reviewed by the NYTBR will depend not on whether a book will stand the test of time in a literary universe, but whether it has currency in the here and now.”

Interesting point. Generally I like that approach – although I think the focus on currency would be hindered if reviews were restricted only to newly published or reprinted books.

Here’s what I mean…

Earlier this week, while I was attending a conference in Pittsburgh, PA, I stopped by a great independent bookstore called Jay’s Bookstall. Browsing there, I came across an intriguing and surprisingly timely book: The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements, by Eric Hoffer. This book was originally published in 1951, and most recently reprinted in 2002. Those details of publication would probably exclude it from most book review venues. However, this book is brilliantly relevant to the current state of the US, and even to the current presidential race. Here’s a quote:

“No matter how vital we think the role of leadership in the rise of a mass movement, there is no doubt that the leader cannot create the conditions which make the rise of a movement possible. He cannot conjure a movement out of the void. There has to be an eagerness to follow and obey, and an intense dissatisfaction with things as they are, before movement and leader can make their appearance.”

I would love it if the concept of “currency” in book reviews applied to relevance of content, not just publishing status. Ultimately, reviews should primarily focus on current relevance, not marketing – at least in my book.

If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds

2 Comments so far (Add 1 more)

  1. Interesting. Along this school of thought, it makes sense for it to stand up to the test of time, though — giving future generations an idea of what previous generations felt and thought about the issues that faced them. Lots of classic literature does just that.

    [Reply]

    1. LadyLitBlitzin on November 7th, 2004 at 12:30 pm
  2. Amy, I pick up books all of the time that are 2, 3, sometimes 40 years or more away from their original release. I think you’re idea of reviewing books based on their relevance to current topics and themes would be great. Sometimes books that are consider artifacts give a great deal of insight into where we are right now and what thoughts and ideologies brought us to this point. It’s one thing to say the New Deal shaped the modern United States, it’s another entirely to read what the contemporaries of the New Deal had to say about it and what they were thinking that inspired it into existence.

    [Reply]

    2. Travis Swicegood on October 29th, 2004 at 2:10 pm