A Blog's Life: Does Blogging = Flogging? - The Book Maven

Home
PW in Print
Newsletters
Reviews
- Audio
- Children's
- Comics
- Fiction
- Nonfiction
- Religion
- Web Exclusives
- See All Reviews
Bookselling
- Indie News
- Retailing
Book News
Book Life
Bestseller Lists
- Audio
- Children's
- Comics
- Fiction
- Paperback
- Nonfiction
- Religion
Commentary
Job Zone
Tools

The Book Maven

Blog

The Book Maven

« Judging Books By: Their Covera... | Main | Recommended Reading: 'The Yidd... »

Link This | Email this | Blog This | Comments (3)

Bethanne Patrick

A Blog's Life: Does Blogging = Flogging?
April 27, 2007

In yesterday's post, I linked to and quoted from Art Winslow's HuffPost piece on declining books coverage in print media.

As "Reader" noted in the Comments, there is a lot going on in Winslow's piece. I wanted to pull out what he said about blogs:

"I would say that blogs have their strengths -- access, immediacy, variety, sharpness of voice -- but accommodation to extended or complex argument is not one of them..."

Access -- check. Immediacy -- check. Variety -- check. Sharpness of voice -- check. Accommodation to extended or complex argument... wait, why isn't this a check, again, Mr. Winslow? Do those of us who talk about books in our blogs simply flog them? (I'm pretty critical, at times; just see my entry on The Feminine Mistake).

I believe Winslow (and many others, including me) would say that the current blog model most of us follow -- writing pithy entries on topical matters -- does not lend itself to complex argument. Winslow (and many others, including me) would also say that part of the reason this is so is because most bloggers don't have editors, and if they do, those editors are not spending the same amount of time editing blog entries as they are spending on pieces for print.

There are many reasons for this, at the moment, not the least of which is many people start blogging without even giving a second thought to having their work vetted. Lots of bloggers keep their Web logs going while working at day jobs, or running several blogs at once, or writing novels, etc. It's also not easy to read anything longer than a few pages on the Web, so a long review or article doesn't translate well to the columnar confines of a blog.

But that doesn't mean the current model has to be the blog-all and end-all. Books can be reviewed carefully, extensively, and with complex argument by bloggers and... wait for it... linked to, or posted in PDF form, or posted in several other ways.

What do you think?

Posted by Bethanne Patrick on April 27, 2007 | Comments (3)

April 27, 2007
In response to: A Blog's Life: Does Blogging = Flogging?
Brian Hadd commented:

Your logic between blogging and flogging is utterly random. You are obviously not stating that bloggers are perhaps more cruel than print commentators but other than that interpretation I cannot think. "Its also not easy to read anything longer than a few pages on the web." I wonder how much of our discussion, rhetoric, is answered in that utterly composite fact. Accomodate complex argument. Blogs are here, what are they, what do they need?

April 28, 2007
In response to: A Blog's Life: Does Blogging = Flogging?
bookishblondish commented:

I use literary blog-reviews as a sieve; I weed through books I am thinking about reading. I turn to long print reviews to find something I wouldn't normally consider. They both serve a purpose. NB: print journalists are much more likely to give a brutal flogging that a blogger.

April 28, 2007
In response to: A Blog's Life: Does Blogging = Flogging?
Kevin A. Lewis commented:

Well said-I surf the blogs in PW to monitor the buzz about the book biz, and maybe play a little opinion ping-pong; if I want heavier analysis I'll read the New Yorker...