So, where did we get our reviewers from? How do you pay for this kind of writing army? Well, it was an eclectic bunch of book lovers from a variety of walks of life (I remember a local judge, in particular, who was quite prolific). They worked for the free book and the chance to work their own literary writing muscle. In many ways they were the precursors to the better-of-the-lot Amazon reviewers. Some of them were quite good; extremely literate folks with perceptive knowledge of the topics and writers, for both non-fiction and fiction. Others, less so, but with fixing on our end, made useful for the job of informing a potential reader.

Before Amazon and bloggers there was simply no real viable way to obtain any opinion or information on the sheer volume of 175,000 books published every year. I know. I was there when 100 reviews every two months was considered heresy and insane. And in many ways, it was. Every month was a small financial miracle that the printer got paid. A few key publisher/advertisers, more or less, kept the boat afloat. Too bad, we really did reach out to that reader mentioned in this piece that was forgotten about by the more elitist reviewing outlets. Our readers loved us and we, unfortunately, put out a piss-poor product – visually and, ultimately, editorially — suppressed by the sheer gravity of poverty surrounding the operation and magnitude of the task (a staff of two or three part-timers for 50 books a month versus, say, the sizable paid professional staff and freelance budget of the LATBR). But it was an early water cooler for a book loving collection of people. And for that, if for nothing else, I tip my hat in memory of its long ago demise. Even in its hobbled state of being (for more than two decades I believe), it was better for the reading world that it existed than had it never existed. And the same goes for all of those people out there now blogging and reviewing and talking about books. Shoot your TV and don’t look back. And don’t worry about what the LATBR does. The promulgation of literacy may be the only thing that saves our silly culture. You are in that forefront. Do it with passion.

While I absolutely agree that critics like Wasserman should be heard (and that his bosses at the LAT seemed to be fine with what he was doing), I gave up on the LATBR during his tenure. Every week, it was like reading paint drying on the wall. Very few female voices were represented, the fiction reviewed struck me as godawful dull, and I swear, if there was a new book about the “real” Shakespeare, it was reviwed with almost absurd reverence. Not only did I see nothing of me in that section, I saw only a small section of my community.

I also think, somewhat, that Wasserman failed his successor (David Ulin). The former left just as it became clear that newspapers were going to be forced to fight for their audience; taking the attitude that stagnant numbers were not worrisome lead to what has to be the most ridiculous compromise for a book review section ever.

I think a newspaper should reflect the community it serves. It is unfortunate that economics drive the news business, but I imagine that has always been the case. The good news is that there is a place for thoughtful, in-depth reviews of all types. Many places. As Wasserman noted, the New York Review of Books maintains an apparently profitable print presence. The Internet has brought together all levels of literary discussion.

This is why I say it’s time for these critics to stop hand-wringing and start coming up with action plans. Romance readers stopped worrying about the lack of newspaper reviews a long time ago; they’ve largely moved to online community. Science fiction readers maybe made the shift a little earlier. Same for mystery. For each of the major genres, you can find discussion ranging from the superficial to the well-considered.

Same goes for literary fiction. It is through the online community that I’ve discovered many great books across the fiction spectrum (and I’ve been seduced and disappointed by more than a few…but at least I was enticed enough to give those books a shot). I cannot say the same thing for the LATBR — given the fact that I was born reading (or close enough for government work), this is a sad statement about my hometown paper. I am exactly the reader that Wasserman says he was trying to reach. I know many more readers like me. No connection was made!

And, oh yes, you touched on one of my favorite things about this world. Genre fiction very often pays the bills for other, less commercial types of fiction. This is good.

I read the kind of books I suppose Wasserman reviews, but I work in a publishing house that produces the kind of books more in line with your Danielle Steel readers. Both are fine, and I seriously doubt Wasserman wants to banish the ‘genre’ (for lack of a better word) readers altogether. For instance, he’s not proposing that newspapers are used as tools to STOP books like Harlequin’s. However, those who enjoy ‘popular’ books like the genres continually attack folks like Wasserman, and with a vehemence that is a little bizarre. They are saying ‘Let us have what we want,’ but rarely, ‘You keep yours and I’ll keep mine.’ So what if book critics talk about less popular, more ‘literary’ books in their reviews? The commercial books get the money, they get their place on the list. Both parties get what they want.

Wasserman did have a good point. The truly snobby thing would be for critics to not put 100% of themselves into their work, to write less complex, nuanced pieces just because they figure nobody will ‘get it.’ Snobbery is something that gets dredged up when people use a certain language often associated with ‘intellectualism.’ Whether or not they are intelligent is beside the point. What is really germane is that people who don’t like that language continually besiege it. Why is that? It may not be better, but let it stand as it is, just as we let Brittany and Barry Bonds stand, though without that same level of outrage that ‘intellectuals’ get. We let a lot of things go in this country, but beware that person who dares to stand up and say, “I want something that’s a bit more complex than Harlequin Presents, and here’s what’s caught my eye; some of you may like it.”

David, thanks for the change comment. It helped when I had a showdown with a parking meter.