Dear Mr. Tannenhaus,
The Green Age of Asher Witherow, M. Allen Cunningham
Mirage, Bandula Chandraratha
The Ha-Ha, Dave King
Fruit, Brian Francis
How to Be Lost, Amanda Eyre Ward
Hell's Half Acre, Will Christopher Baer
Angels Crest, Leslie Schwartz
Meritocracy, Jeffrey Lewis
Homeland, R.H. Weber
Tigor and The Perfect American, both by Peter Stephan Jungk
Phanton Pain, Arnon Grunberg
Banishing Verona, Margot Livesey
The Story of My Baldness, Marek Van Der Jagt
Queen of Dreams, Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni
The Book of Dead Birds, Gayle Brandeis
Sayonara Gansters, Genichiro Takahashi
A Girl Becomes a Comma Like That, Lisa Glatt
Beatiful Somewhere Else, Stephen Policoff
Happy Baby, Stephen Elliott
What is this, you're no doubt asking. I'll tell you - it's a list of potentially worthy books that had no hope of being reviewed in this weekend's New York Times Book Review because you felt it necessary to give over a full page - in these days when everyone laments the lack of precious column inches afforded to book coverage - to a pair of historians who didn't even mention the word "book" once (well, OK, maybe once), much less discuss anything of remotely literary significance.
For the record, NYTBR isn't Foreign Affairs; nor is it The New Republic; nor is it any other political journal. It's a review of books - I know 'cause it says so in the title.
On behalf of your readers, I respectfully request our page back. Books, if you please.
Cordially,
Mark Sarvas
The Elegant Variation
Great list Mark, and great general letter to begin with. I've quit paying attn to the NYTBR, barely skimming the weekly email I receive from them. I can't remember the last book I followed up on after reading a review there.
Enjoy,
Posted by: Dan Wickett | July 25, 2004 at 08:31 PM
Great letter!
Posted by: M.J. Rose | July 26, 2004 at 05:33 AM
word, mark. for a brief moment yesterday, i felt like the universe contracted in on itself and formed some sort of parallel time warp thingie. then i looked up, confused - no, there was my foreign affairs, across the room on the coffee table. funny you mention fa in your letter, heh.
Posted by: basquette | July 26, 2004 at 06:14 AM
I have to agree. Both Gaddis and Kennedy played a big part in my undergadute and graduate education and I am fascinated by their work and ideas. But the connection to the NYTRB seems tenuous at best. At least Gaddis has a book out recently. Seems silly given the many other places a discussion like this could have gone to put it in the book section. Perhaps if enough people communicate their displeasure a repeat can be prevented.
Posted by: Kevin Holtsberry | July 26, 2004 at 06:41 AM
In all fairness, the NYTBR already reviewed Lisa's novel as well as Stephen's.
I'm actually in favor of these back-page chats--certainly in preference to the limp essays that usually run there. I think this second installment, which actually featured two people who had reviews running in the current issue, was a bit more effective than the first. The execution might still need a little refinement, but I don't see any reason why a good book review can't have room for discussions that springboard from the issues brought up in the reviews...and, of course, the books.
Posted by: Ron Hogan | July 26, 2004 at 07:50 AM
If I wanna read long, boring essays about the savage history of imperialist America, I can always pick up Harper's, The Atlantic or any of a dozen other publications. This is why I no longer subscribe to the NYT. I can extract the thousand words I'm interested in online and be done with it in about 5 minutes--10 on Sundays.
Posted by: Jimmy Beck | July 26, 2004 at 09:01 AM
Thanks for keeping me honest, Ron - the dangers of advancing age and increased alcohol blood level. You better than most will recognize my list are largely representing the contents of my post-BEA suitcase.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one; when the NYTBR hits 64 pages then perhaps I won't feel the loss of a single one so keenly. But until then, this kind of exercise has no place. If ST wants to be a political reporter he should move to the Washington Bureau.
Posted by: TEV | July 26, 2004 at 09:07 AM
The NYTBR is a windmill , brother Mark.
Also, I am willing to bet that Margot Livesey's new novel is reviewed (is it even out yet?) there.
I bet, upon reflection, you would agree. What were you thinking?
Posted by: birnbaum | July 26, 2004 at 04:24 PM
I'm sure the Livesey will be reviewed at some point, but it hasn't been yet.
I'm okay with agreeing to disagree. But, hey, at least this time they're talking about something inspired by what they read in books!
Posted by: Ron | July 26, 2004 at 05:57 PM
This is R.H. Weber, author of HOMELAND: A Novel. Thanks for the mention.
And you're right, NYTBR not valuable for book reviews any longer. Compare a recent copy to a copy from 25-30 years ago. NYTBR was never the NYRB, but NYTBR has certainly taken a nosedive since those years. Tough to figure out what it's supposed to be doing now ... besides selling ad space.
Posted by: R.H. Weber | July 28, 2004 at 04:07 PM
Point taken. Here’s our reasoning. First, we’re trying to make the Book Review a timely and lively publication that connects books to the broader culture in the best tradition of American literary sections going back to Partisan Review, the New Republic, and the Nation in the 1930s up through The New York Review of Books today. Our hope is that by making the Times Book Review more relevant week to week we'll draw more readers into the world of books. Beyond this, the back page has historically been a place to widen the discussion and explore different aspects of the literary-intellectual life. That life, I might add, has many dimensions, no less so today than in prior eras, and we want to do justice to that multi-dimensionality in our pages (not only on the back page). This is why we did an issue on music books a while back and followed up soon after with an issue in which prime space went to four short-story collections. We also recently published a “Chronicle” on first novels (and then singled out two of those novels for our Bear in Mind feature). And stay tuned: you’ll see fiction prominently reviewed in the weeks to come. Thanks for watching us so closely.
Best regards,
Sam Tanenhaus
Editor
New York Times Book Review
Posted by: Sam Tanenhaus | July 31, 2004 at 06:16 PM
I worked with Sam's wife, now more than a decade ago, and remember when Sam had first started out writing his ultimately excellent biography of W. Chambers. I remember being struck by his genuine open-mindedness in tackling a difficult subject. I have no doubt that he exercises this same receptivity to new books, topics and ideas--both fiction and non-fiction--at the NYTBR.
Posted by: COA | January 13, 2005 at 10:06 AM