| "Ragtag Bloggers" vs Mainstream Media; A Preview of MELVILLE BIOGRAPHY | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 8 2012, 12:07 PM (358 Views) | |
| Payback | Sep 8 2012, 12:07 PM Post #1 |
|
In MELVILLE BIOGRAPHY: AN INSIDE NARRATIVE Brodhead and Davidson have featured roles, with due attention to his "moral meltdown" and her brilliant contribution to the language, "blog hooligan." As publication nears Daniel Green, a pioneer of responsible (I would say brilliant) Internet literary reviewing has published an excerpt from my Ch. 7, which is on the contrast between the declining of honest reviewing in the mainstream media and the (sometimes) rising of responsible of Internet litblogging. Green's printing this makes me feel better about my attempt to understand what's going on in the world of literary blogging. http://noggs.typepad.com/thereadingexperience/2012/09/hershel-parker.html Ragtag Bloggers The eminent Herman Melville scholar Hershel Parker (Herman Melville: A Biography, Melville: The Making of the Poet, Moby-Dick as Doubloon) recently contributed a comment on an older TRE post that, as it turns out, is actually a brief excerpt from his forthcoming book, Melville Biography: An Inside Narrative. Professor Parker has agreed to let me re-post the excerpt here as a free-standing post. It is taken from Chapter 7 of the book (Agenda-Driven Reviewers), and will be of obvious interest to long-standing readers of this blog (as well as literary blogs in general). As I finish Melville Biography: An Inside Narrative it seems possible that a pack of New York City reviewers can never annihilate any well-researched book as totally as they could do in 2002. The usually innocuous New York Times Book Review survives, in diminished state, as does the often rabid New York Review of Books, and they are read, still. Yet never again will pompous, error-filled articles in the New Yorker or self-serving misrepresentations and outright lies in the Nation or the New York Times or the New York Review of Books or the New Republic hold place on the Internet unchallenged for years. When John Palattella in the Nation (June 2, 2010) lamented “The Death and Life of the Book Review” (arguing that book review sections should not be judged by whether they turn a profit) “TheBigAl” posted this comment on the Nation website: “You don’t seem aware of the breadth of quality literary blogs on the Internet. As an editor, we find these days that we often have more luck getting attention from persuasive and prestigious blogs than from newspaper book review sections, where editors have their own agendas.” A blogger posted: “Beyond Barnes & Noble Review there are actually a number of websites that provide quality books coverage,” among them “The Complete Review” and “Berfrois.” Daniel Green, one of the heroes of Internet reviewing, quoted Palattella’s claim that although we “are in the throes of another newspaper crisis” nothing has appeared in print or online the way newspaper strikes brought forth the New York Review of Books and the London Review of Books. On June 3, 2010, Green objected: “This is manifestly not the case. Just two examples: The Quarterly Conversation and Open Letters Monthly. You might have more honestly said, ‘Nothing comparable to the NYRB or the LRB written and edited by recognized, mainstream literary journalists, preferably based in New York, has emerged.’” Rain Taxi in the Summer 2005 issue (that early) contained Scott Esposito’s survey, “Litblogs Provide a New Alternative for Readers.” A writer on the topic of litblogs was sometimes lucky if a link to a brilliant litblog or personal literary blog outlasted a recommendation. Nevertheless, the situation is stabilizing, Esposito made clear: One trait shared by virtually all litbloggers is their enthusiasm for defying mainstream opinion, and because of this willingness to offer a countervailing point of view the litblogging community has managed to attract a substantial audience in a relatively short period of time. The highest-trafficked blogs get thousands of hits per day (sometimes tens of thousands if they’re in the news), and the publishing industry has taken note. Many litbloggers regularly get galleys from publishers ranging from Random House to Copper Canyon Press to the Dalkey Archive, and anecdotal evidence indicates that their coverage has helped sell books and prop up emerging authors . . . . Several well-regarded midlist authors . . . have done interviews with litbloggers, and some publicists are beginning to develop lasting relationships with favored litbloggers. After intelligent reviews of my 2008 Melville: The Making of the Poet appeared in litblogs and individual blogs, I arranged that review copies of The Powell Papers (2011) be sent to some of the bloggers. I expect that presses, more and more, will send review copies to litblogs and pre-tested bloggers (the “veteran” bloggers of the future), where the best reviewers consistently write more intelligently than the average New York Review of Books pontificator. Of course there is resistence to Internet reviewing. On his Reading Experience 2.0 site (October 23, 2007) Daniel Green hilariously surveys the motives of the blog-bashers: “The disdain for literary blogs and other ‘nontraditional’ sources of literary discussion that drips from the pens of Gail Pool and Richard Schickel and Michael Dirda must rise from a mounting fear that their sense of separation from mere ‘amateurs’ is at risk: If you can’t look down on bloggers, after all, who can you look down on?” The hacks and the occasional admirable mainstream media reviewers will not soon be driven out by “ragtag bloggers” (although newspaper book review sections are dying month by month), but authors may have multiple chances to be heard in the new Internet age. We will see what happens when MELVILLE BIOGRAPHY: AN INSIDE NARRATIVE is ready to be reviewed. Edited by Payback, Sep 8 2012, 12:09 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Baldo | Sep 8 2012, 01:47 PM Post #2 |
|
"If you can’t look down on bloggers, after all, who can you look down on?” The monopoly has been broken, that is what they are pissed about! |
![]() |
|
| Joan Foster | Sep 8 2012, 04:08 PM Post #3 |
|
|
![]() |
|
| kbp | Sep 8 2012, 05:42 PM Post #4 |
|
...self-serving misrepresentations and outright lies ...editors have their own agendas ...edited by recognized, mainstream literary journalists The main, or lame, stream media is killing itself. I wish you the best of luck with your next publication. |
![]() |
|
| Payback | Sep 8 2012, 09:18 PM Post #5 |
|
Thanks, Baldo, Joan, and kbp. When I wrote this chapter a couple of years ago I did the best I could to research litblogs and write something that would not be out of date long before the book was anywhere near ready. Daniel Green's endorsement is the best I could possibly have, since all other serious litbloggers read him. And I see tonight that he did me another big favor by tweeting 30 or so other litblogs about the excerpt from my book, describing it as my commenting on online litblogs. Some of the recipients, I am hoping, will ask for review copies. In a few months we just might see several litbloggers rejoicing at my depiction of the corruption of the mainstream media and the corruption of particular professors we all know. We are not where we were a few years ago--not passive victims any more. All hail blog hooligans! May Cathy Davidson live to regret her one stroke of verbal genius! |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic » |






9:51 AM Jul 11