Questions ..

[Joshua Lind]

From: Tim Strzechowski <dedalus204 at comcast.net>

> What is the relationship between "book review" and "literary 
> criticism"?  Does One *lead* to the Other?  
> 
> Does one *inform* the other?  If so, how?

Tim,

Those are great questions.  I think book reviews are often just first impressions of a novel, while literary criticism represents deeper analysis.  Some reviews have lasting merit because the reviewer seemed to catch the gist of it, while other reviews miss the mark because they concentrate on some aspect of the novel that doesn't hold up after further study.

I've recently become interested in Marguerite Young's novel "Miss McIntosh, My Darling," but the novel seems to have been spurned by literary critics.  Book reviews are about the only thing to go on.  If I were to work on a piece of literary criticism, I would necessarily have to start with the book reviews because they represent the only possible material for a literature review.

It's important to keep in mind that reviewers are under a deadline and are sometimes forced into less-than-"in-depth" analyses.  The famous example is the reception of William Gaddis's "The Recognitions."  Jack Green's blistering broadside against those reviewers makes for interesting reading.  It's available at:

  http://www.nyx.net/~awestrop/ftb/ftb.htm

-Josh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20061215/20ccb4d2/attachment.html>