Holy crap. What follows is not for the faint of heart. This week the LA Times draws a straight failing grade for what is unquestionably the worst issue of the Book Review we've seen since we humbly appointed ourselves ombudsmen. We're sort of startled by its thoroughgoing badness, so bear we with us, please, if we're even snarkier than usual ...
STATS
Full length fiction reviews: 1 (Yes. One. Once again. And a Lawrence Block thriller at that, of which more to come.)
Full length non-fiction reviews: 7
Columns: Poets' Corner and Discoveries.
TITLES, AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
Plan B by Anne Lamott. Reviewed by Bernadette Murphy Grade: F
Pound for Pound by Herb Boyd with Ray Robinson II. Reviewed by Walter Bernstein Grade: C
Princesses by Flora Fraser. Reviewed by Kathryn Shevelow Grade: C
One Nation, Under God by James P. Moore, Jr. Reviewed by Jason Berry. Grade: C-
All the Flowers are Dying by Lawrence Block. Reviewed by Dick Lochter. Grade: C-
The Friar and the Cipher by Lawrence and Nancy Goldstone. Reviewed by Michael Haag. Grade: C+
Revolutionary Mothers by Carol Berkin. Reviewed by Ruth Rosen. Grade: B
Django by Michael Dregnl. Reviewed by David French. Grade: B
Malraux by Olivier Todd. Reviewed by William Pfaff. Grade: D-
Poets' Corner Column: School of the Arts by Mark Doty and Ledger by Susan Wheeler. Reviewed by Carol Muske-Dukes. Grade: A
Discoveries Column: The Exception to the Rulers by Amy Goodman with David Goodman; Enchantments by Linda Ferri; and Area Women Blows Gasket by Patricia Pearson. Reviewed by Susan Salter Reynolds. Grade: B
WHAT WE LIKE ...
Not a whole helluva lot beyond tossing it onto the recycling bin ... The back pages columns continue to be among the more reliably interesting parts of the review and, as she has before, Carol Muske-Dukes (a nominee for California Poet Laureate) makes the volumes she reviews sound both accessible and appealing ... and Susan Salter Reynolds' Discoveries can usually be counted on to tip us off to a few promising new titles ... Among the full length reviews, the only one that held any sustained interest for us - despite a lede filled with some questionable assertions - was Rosen's review of the Berkin book which sounds both disturbing and illuminating ... Still, little to cheer about this week.
WHAT WE DON'T ...
Basically, everything else. And before indignant reviewers write in to chatise us for being low graders, we'd like to remind you that low grades aren't always a mark of a badly written review - often, yes, but the grade also reflects an arbitrary measure of the relevancy of a reviewed title to the L.A. reading public. So, for example, although there's nothing wrong with Lochter's workmanlike review of the Lawrence Block, was it necessary to allocate the issue's sole fiction review to a largely review-proof series? ... If recent issues are any guide, Wasserman and co. seem to feel the only fiction we all care about is either the Book of the Moment (Saturday) or whodunnits and thrillers ... We'd put the review of Princesses in the same camp - a fine review, but a whole page given over to the daughters of King George? Wasserman's monarchist tendencies are showing ... The review of the Sugar Ray book might have been graded higher if reviewer Walter Bernstein didn't feel that he was at least as interesting as his subject and thus merited constant insertions into the review ... But these defects pale when held against the most wretched reviews of the lot ... Pfaff's review of the Malraux biography is given over to impressing us with how well versed he is on the life of the the former Culture Minister of France, and devotes precisely one paragraph - the review's last - to the book itself ... Nice of him to get around to it ... And Murphy's review of the Lamott is just a disaster, a mawkish poorly written look ("checkered past" ... "howlingly funny") at what sounds like a mawkish, poorly written inspirational tract ... There's more to complain about - Reviewer Berry is shockingly uncritical of James Moore's dissertation on prayer in public life ... but you get the point ... We're tapped out ... Who needs a drink?
GRADE: F. This issue is a straight failure, from the lack of any serious fiction coverage at all, to the welter of irrelevant and/or scandalously poorly written reviews. Not much more to say, except that hate mail is always welcome. Better luck next time.