Kang and Kodos

Many years ago (it was 23rd April 2007), someone masquerading as me wrote an article for The Guardian which, aside from the first paragraph – which has always seemed to me a trifle awkward (I have long since banned the use of italics, as the desperation of an incompetent stylist) – actually is not too embarrassingly written (I wonder where I got the phrase “Bergsonian sensitivity to the intricacies of individual consciousness” from?).

The point of the article was that I’ve always found newspaper reviews for books to be written from the point of view of someone with no literary discrimination whatever, and therefore useless and misleading for a boy in the process of discovering literature; that indeed my own discovery of literature has been almost entirely based on wholly ignoring newspaper reviews. One thing that perhaps I didn’t get across sufficiently was how the internet has aided this discovery: in particular how it’s led me to so many authors, famous in their countries (and often South American), whom I’d never heard of before and who, I’m prepared to hazard, have never been mentioned in newspapers in this country in my lifetime.

Amazon – I must confess – has been a great help in this. But not perhaps in the dichotomic way that newspapers like to believe.

A few of us have been reading articles recently which comment on the threat posed to newspaper reviews by the internet (which is, of course, merely a small grain of sand in the greater debate on the threat posed to newspapers by the internet), and we may have noticed this dichotomy (it has, after all, been repeated in every single newspaper article on the subject in the last five years): that there are professionally written newspapers reviews, and then there’s people’s opinions of books stuck up on Amazon: – and perhaps we’d felt a little bit aggrieved; because for all our own efforts – for all this time each of us has wasted here – there’s seemingly nothing else.

This was where I intended to put my reference to Kang and Kodos, and where I find myself piping up – as I often do – as the man who declares, “I believe I’ll vote for a third-party candidate” – and who for his folly is roundly laughed at by all.

As someone who’s never taken “professional” book reviews seriously, why would I turn instead to the “amateur” reviews on Amazon? As so often in the contemporary world of literary talk, I see no difference where people are trying to stake a claim for there being every difference. It is all useless to my purpose. No, where Amazon has come in useful in my discovery of literature, is that I can actually obtain these books by writers no one’s heard of – which were published probably back in the 60s and 70s, perhaps by the presses of American Universities – for surprisingly little cost.

But I have to note too that Amazon (and its recent subsidiary, Goodreads) do not constitute the whole of the literary internet. There is a world outside either newspapers reviews and the webpages of Amazon, a world full of the most startling variety, a flourishing of literary opinion on a scale never before seen. It is true, like newspapers and Amazon, most of it is not to our taste: but where it differs is, that some of it is – and that some is all we need. We may been startled to come across that curious thing we’d never met before (not outside the real world of literature, at least): people whose opinions and tastes and ideas we find ourselves inclined to agree with, or at least to be not wholly and immediately contemptible. And if enough of these people congregate, a little world is formed, in which people can feel a fair degree of confidence in one another and guide one another towards the worthwhile – a world which, in its collective nature, can filter out the noise from the literary world, which is perhaps a hard if not impossible task for the individual – a world which, dare I say it, needs neither newspaper reviews nor Amazon. In my utopian vision, literary joy will in the future be passed along such tangled webs, like the fibre optics of the internet itself, pursuing in its course an endless winding trail of similar tastes and disbursing only happiness and gratification (in discrete packets) along with the occasional moment when we decide that other people’s tastes are, after all, sometimes completely unaccountable, all at the same time shielding us from the trauma of being misled about the worth of what is mediocre and absent of talent. Either that, or some corporate-dominated machine-written dystopia. Or some third thing which is neither of the other two.

7 thoughts on “Kang and Kodos

  1. There is much I would like to read, and haven’t yet. It’s not just that my reading time is limited: with advancing years, and with family & work commitments, the time during which my mind is sufficiently alert is also limited. like yourself, I have read many books that have received glowing reviews, and have even festooned with awards, only to find myself disappointed. Now, I’m sure there are lots of old stuff in there I aven’t read, but I don’t ave the time or the patience or the energy to sift through all the dross to find the good ones. If that means I miss out on a lot of good stuff – well, that’s going to happen whatever I do.

    And so I read the classics almost exclusively, because the passage of time has already done much of the filtering. That doesn’t mean that I like everything I read, but it does increase the probability that I’ll like my next book. But you’re right: following those in BookBlogLand whose tastes seem similar to mine should also be a good way to find out those books I may like.

  2. Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos.

    If you think British papers are useless, you should see the American newspapers. Hoo boy.

    We have quite a lot of good writing about literature in magazines, although many of the writers of the newspapers vs. Amazon & Goodreads pieces do not seem to know that the print magazines exist any more than they know about online magazines or book blogs.

    I am not sure why people keep writing those pieces, but now I can just direct them to this post. It is unlikely that I will actually do that, but you have crushed this foolish dichotomy.

  3. AOG: I suppose I too primarily read the classics. I probably read about 5 books a year by living writers, and most of them are pretty old.

    AR: Yes, it’s almost as if they have pre-conceived ideas about these things, and are unwilling to do the slightest research which might contradict this.

  4. I can’t blame anybody but myself for this, but I feel it basically took a good 4-5 years of blogging for me to discover that core of people w/opinions of the “not wholly and immediately contemptible variety.” Now that I’ve discovered your blog, Himadri’s and Tom’s, and those of many mutual friends, I can finally understand your utopian pipe dreams; however, it feels like I went through several years of worrying that if I lost 1-2 of my regular readers, my book blogging goose would be cooked and I would have a future writing posts that inspired zero to one comments for eternity. Pathetically, I had a dream just the other day in which a new to me reader commented on a book review post of mine that I would never build an audience reviewing the books I was reading. I laughed, but ha, the joke’s still on me! Anyway, good job covering all the bases at the end of your post and great clip about the third-party candidate. Also, thanks for sharing your newspaper contribution–I enjoyed it and the responses you received about it that I’ve had a chance to look at so far.

  5. I have not escaped those feelings: I always feel like I’m blogging on the very edge of an abyss. The internet is littered with intriguing book blogs which have come to an abrupt halt in 2010 (or whatever – see, for instance, taken at random, this blog I just found: http://liberreview.blogspot.co.uk/), people who’ve finally given up hope that anyone else out reads anything worthwhile any more and they just might as well keep it all to themselves. I myself have given up and begun again (naturally, losing readers along the way).

    I should try and make more effort to find these people before they are overcome by despair.

  6. Hi,
    Long time reader, first time caller. Just thought I’d pop my head above the parapet to thank you for your blog and which has inspired many purchases. I guess this post is as good as any to uh, point this out, for what it’s worth.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s