The chair of the judges for this year's Man Booker Prize complains that book bloggers will harm literature by writing inferior reviews and encouraging the public to buy all the wrong books. Interestingly, he seems to be assuming, essentially without question, that those uninformed book bloggers will encourage the public to buy "readable" books, which he seems to equate with books of limited artistic value.
But does the average paid and traditionally published book reviewer really focus entirely on artistic and literary merit? And does the average home blogger focus entirely on readability, on a good pulpy page-turner? If I were to judge from perfume bloggers, I'd assume the opposite--perfumes on the artistic edge seem to get more exposure from the amateur perfume blogger than from almost anyone else. Of course, the perfume world, unlike the literary world, has traditionally suffered from a lack of independent criticism. But all the same, I don't assume that the amateur will always seek the sweet, obvious, and exciting.
This article in the Guardian responds with a defense of book bloggers, one sufficiently eloquent that no comment immediately comes to my mind, so I just encourage you to go read it.
(Side note one: This all makes me think of the recent post and discussion about "wearable" perfumes, which included a certain amount of commentary on "drinkable" wines.)
(Side note two: When I use the term "amateur" in this blog, I mean a person who follows a pursuit primarily reasons other than financial compensation. That person may be a beginner, or they may have more skill than the average paid profession.)
Image: By Raider of Gin. Wikimedia Commons.
