I’ve written before about Kurt Vonnegut’s satirical short story, “Harrison Bergeron,” and its Handicapper General, Diana Moon Glampers. She’s the one who makes sure no one stands out as better than anyone else by assigning the appropriate handicap. This doesn’t seem so much like satire in the current environment of political correctness.
I just came across a reaction by Zoë Heller to the proposition posited by Lee Siegel for The New Yorker and Isaac Fitzgerald at BuzzFeed that reviewers should only publish positive book reviews. Siegel and Fitzgerald feel we shouldn’t say anything negative about the poor authors who have worked so hard. Heller makes the case that banning “negativity” is bad for the culture and unfair to authors. I couldn’t agree more. In fact I more than agree.
In my brief career as a freelance journalist, I did some book reviews for the Radcliffe alumni journal, whatever it was called. Only positive remarks was one of the guidelines Okay, I get it, it’s an alumni magazine, essentially a vanity affair. But the public media? Really! Really? Really?!?
A review that points out the strengths and the weaknesses of a work helps us think like grownups, critically, incisively, looking for the best, sloughing off the trivial and debased. Without informed criticism, how could we know where to start in the plethora of new media offerings every day? Of course, to write critically is to open yourself to criticism. I always mistrust laudatory reviews by authors just about to publish a book. I rely on fearless critics like William Logan to hone my own discriminating taste. So here’s to thoughtful criticism. Long may it raise our standards.
Not to be overly critical, I loved your “vanity affair” pun.
Glad you liked it, Jackie!
What you said, I like it.
It could even have been a longer rant, but…
“Bierce’s writings for the San Francisco Examiner were renowned for their unadulterated attacks on local dignitaries whom he felt needed taking down a notch or two. One such dignitary was Arpad Haraszthy, son of Agoston Haraszthy, one of the founding fathers of California wine. Arpad Haraszthy was famous for his Eclipse Champagne, the state’s first successful sparkling wine, and was also the founder of San Francisco’s Bohemian Club. Despite the success of Haraszthy’s wine, Bierce clearly had little time for it: “The wine of Arpad Haraszthy has a bouquet all its own. It tickles and titillates the palate. It gurgles as it slips down the alimentary canal. It warms the cockles of the heart, and it burns the sensitive lining of the stomach.” Such a description prompted Haraszthy to threaten libel action, which resulted in a retraction from Bierce even more damning than his original assessment: “The wine of Arpad Haraszthy does not have a bouquet all its own. It does not tickle and titillate the palate. It does not gurgle as it slips down the alimentary canal. It does not warm the cockles of the heart, and it does not burn the sensitive linings of the stomach” (Alone in Bad Company, 200).
Great story, Thank you!