The New York Times wonders if traditional book reviewers are kaput.
The Los Angeles Times recently merged its once stand-alone book review into a new section combining the review with the paper’s Sunday opinion pages, effectively cutting the number of pages devoted to books to 10 from 12. Last year The San Francisco Chronicle’s book review went from six pages to four. All across the country, newspapers are cutting book sections or running more reprints of reviews from wire services or larger papers.To some authors and critics, these moves amount to yet one more nail in the coffin of literary culture. But some publishers and literary bloggers — not surprisingly — see it as an inevitable transition toward a new, more democratic literary landscape where anyone can comment on books.
I think the latter is correct. We are in a transitional period. Actually, transition is the only sure thing. Society is always in transition, whether we acknowledge it or not. Readers today have, if anything, too many choices. I don’t have a hard time finding a good book, I have a hard time imagining how I will find time for ALL the good books. It’s my hope that by 2020, I’ll have several thousand book reviews racked up on this blog. I’m my own publishing empire.
Niche markets catering to discriminating audiences are the future of reviewing. My thoughts on a variety of products, from books to guns, are my most enduringly perused posts.
Those who have made a living in the past as old media book reviewers must learn the age old rule of adapt or die.