Files
kfitz.info/content/blog/2004-01-23-the-book-may-not-be-dead.md
Kathleen Fitzpatrick 655ad0ded8 upgrade to 3.0
2024-10-14 19:27:15 -04:00

16 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

---
title: 'The Book May Not Be Dead...'
date: '2004-01-23T11:06:05-05:00'
permalink: /the-book-may-not-be-dead/
tags:
- novels
---
…but its possible that the book review is.
Or at least that the serious book-review publication is. Witness this [demoralizing development](http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=57&aid=59576) at the [New York Times Book Review](http://nytimes.com/pages/books/review/index.html): as if we didnt all already know that the NYTBR was skewed toward non-fiction, this is in the process of becoming official editorial policy. Moreover, what fiction gets reviewed will now lean explicitly toward the airport-novel, and decidedly away from the literary.
What effect might this shift have on the publishing industry? Will the industry turn away, at least in part, from the NYTBRs arbitration of success, or will this “marginalization”[^1] of literature in the review-world cause the publishing industry to follow suit?
[^1]: I have to put this in scare quotes in no small part because Ive spent the last several decades (or so it feels) working on a manuscript thats precisely about how these metaphors of “marginalization” with regard to the literary are (a) untrue, and (b) politically suspect. I now find myself, in many regards, pondering the ironies of that stance.