Comments on: Professionals vs. Amateurs

By: Greg Padley

Greg Padley — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:05:19 +0000

There’s more than one way to skin a cat…I think most people combine information from several resources to determine a purchase - book or otherwise.
The “professional” reviewer should be working within a specific professional framework and is supposed to be somewhat neutral. You could check his/he other review to learn more about him/her.
The “amateur” reviewer could be a liar, a kook, a scam to boost rankings or the author’s mother.
Your friend, cousin, business associate is a source you know so you know if they suggest a book you will/ won’t like it based on your knowledge of this reviewer.
McEwan is naive if he dosen’t realize this fact.

By: Van Michaels

Van Michaels — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:54:48 +0000

I don’t think there is any relevance to professional book reviewers unless they know, practice and apply real literary criticism in their approach to a review.

There is a distinction between the opinion of a reader and a professional literary critic and both are useful in determining if a novel is meant for a reader.

The novels I choose are based on my perspective, desires, likes, dislikes and emotional needs at the time I am choosing. The novels I finish reading satisfy those, the novels I stop reading, don’t.

A literary critic delves into the substance, structure and meaning of what was written and how. He or she compares, contrasts and exposes the significance, relevance and craft of the novel using principals and contextual understanding of literary criticism.

This, imperfect as it is, serves as a catalyst for the reader to choose one novel over another because both were held up against similar scrutiny of the authors’ craft and purpose.

I prefer first to read the professional literary critic’s thoughts on a novel - I know from this if the novel is worth choosing because it might satisfy what fiction I need to read.

What I look for in the comments of other readers is a clue for someone looking to find the same thing in the book - and if they did.

By: Lori

Lori — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:42:01 +0000

To Mr. McEwan, I ask this: who ultimately pays your salary? Reviewers? Readers? I understand where his concern may lie. Too many readers may not like a story for personal reasons. And that’s fine. However, McEwan should understand that we’re smart enough to discern whose reviews are in line with our own tastes. For example, I’m not going to take the opinion of a high-school kid who was forced to read the book to heart. This is someone who didn’t choose to read it independently. Then again, book reviewers work under similar conditions, no?

By: Darren

Darren — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:34:38 +0000

I think Lisa was spot-on with her last few comments. You can usually discern when a reviewer’s opinion is legitimate. And I’m not talking about discarding a review because of a grammatical error or mis-spelling. We all do that. But it’s the combination of everything — the language used, the tone, the linear thought process (or lack thereof)… I think it’s pretty easy to pick out the kooks. But that still doesn’t solve the problems of the “gamers” that Jim mentioned. They’re usually pretty articulate.

By: Alan Margulis

Alan Margulis — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:21:29 +0000

I suspect the author’s intention is to censor criticism, but I can understand a macro-level objection to anyone and everyone being able to publish their thoughts, regardless of qualifications. We’re becoming a narcissist culture that values talking more than listening. Writing more than reading. And the end result is going to be generations of junk where art and literature once existed.

By: Jodi Kaplan

Jodi Kaplan — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 13:30:36 +0000

While there are situations in which professional expertise is critical (brain surgery for example), I agree with Morty that Mr. McEwan is being arrogant. I’m not Mario Batali, but that doesn’t disqualify me from cooking dinner!

By: Professionals vs. Amateurs : My Netrepreneur

Professionals vs. Amateurs : My Netrepreneur — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:21:38 +0000

[…] Professionals vs. Amateurs Novelist Ian McEwan doesn’t like the fact that you can post your opinion of his books on Amazon.com. “I don’t have much time for the kind of site where readers do all the reviewing,” says McEwan in an interview with Time magazine (6/18/07, p. 6). “Reviewing takes expertise, wisdom, and judgment,” he says. “I am not much […] […]

By: Tim King

Tim King — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 13:31:14 +0000

Professional reviewers don’t review just for the passion of it. They review because they have to. And they’re very good at it. Ironically, as a result, many of them lose the magic that made reading fun, and they lose the ability to communicate that magic to me, a potential reader. (I notice this also in movie reviews, TV reviews, video game reviews, etc.)

To put it another way, if you don’t like a site where readers do all the reviewing, what would you rather have? A site where non-readers do the reviewing?

-TimK

By: Patti

Patti — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 10:44:42 +0000

I am rarely looking for “literature” when I select a book to read. I suppose “literature” is nice. I read about 200 books a year, about half and half fiction and non-fiction. What I look for in a book is the ability to amuse or educate while still being easy to read.

Telling me that a book is “important to the genre” while unreadable doesn’t make sense. If it is important and yet a crappy job of writing and editing, what’s important?

Professional reviewers can get so wrapped up in their own importance that they make statements like that above while not really thinking it through. I suppose authors who are “important to the genre” and write crappy stuff like it, however.

By: Dianna Huff

Dianna Huff — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 09:44:57 +0000

I agree with Lisa. I remember reading a Parents Magazine review of Star Wars (the very first movie) back in the day. The movie critic completely panned it. Said it was dumb.

I think I saw that movie a half dozen times — and it’s still my favorite.

I’m sure George Lucas is laughing all the way to bank.