[Mark Kohut]

First, it BETTER BE front page of The NYT Book Review. (If it isn't, that will be the new editor's judgment call)
 
Best for selling the book is, no surprise, a full court rave, nuances be damned, from a Name. (When Nadine Gordimer went to Oslo
over Roth's The Plot Against America).  
Second is a full court rave by a Nobody Famous but everyone sorta knows...(forgot the book but Robert Nathan praising someone
to the skies is an example....
A nuanced 'balanced' review--say like some plisters on the last two books---by a NAME can be ...not so good. "Well, Salman's review was 
"mixed'---)which his wasn't for Vineland just sayin' as an example.....so the Upper West Side readers all over the US say "reviews were mixed'  (which is
now what I read about IV, despite a wide, wider, widest number of ositive reviews.....(but the best were 'mixed' or intelligently negative...
 
Michael Dirda will probably review it for the Wash Post......Carolyn Kellogg for the LA Times (unless she does some kind of story and her
editor decides on Kipen or Ulin or who knows? 

From: Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
To: Joe Allonby <joeallonby at gmail.com>; rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> 
Cc: "“pynchon-l at waste.org“" <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
Sent: Monday, May 6, 2013 3:26 PM
Subject: Re: 



I hope for ...a reviewer not connected with technology.


From: Joe Allonby <joeallonby at gmail.com>
To: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> 
Cc: "“pynchon-l at waste.org“" <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
Sent: Monday, May 6, 2013 3:24 PM
Subject: Re:


How about Neal Stephenson?

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 4:18 PM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
> who wants to bet William Gibson reviews Bleeding Edge?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130506/1877a83d/attachment.html>