Book reviews all over the country have been bemoaning, and rightfully so, their dwindling pages. The New York Times is no different. "Dear New York Times" is a semi-regular feature focusing on some things that particular paper could do, in my opinion, to be more culturally relevant.
Dear New York Times:
In Jincy Willett's review of Sarah Dunn's novel "Secrets to Happiness" she writes: "Also, unlike chick lit, chick TV and chick movies, 'Secrets to Happiness' is actually funny." Really? The entire genre is disposable? This is not the first time the editors at the NYTBR have neglected to rein in the offensive words of those who seek to malign an entire genre written primarily by, about and for women. (Feel free to google "Curtis Sittenfeld" + "Melissa Bank.") Would you allow a line in a review to run claiming, "Also, unlike African American lit, African American TV and African American movies, [Colson Whitehead's] 'Sag Harbor' is actually well written?" I didn't think so. Cut it out.
How about the rest of you? See anything in print reviews lately that's gotten under your skin?
Be well. Don't forget to write.