Yannic Heinlein Bibliography

ES GiBT KEINE BÜCHER ZU GEWINNEN!  Dies ist eine Leserunde zur Vorbereitung auf unsere Märchen-Werwolf-Runde BITTE NUTZT NICHT DAS BEWERBUNGSFORMULAR!  🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄 🍄  Willkommen in der Märchenwelt von den Gebrüdern Grimm und Hans Christian Andersen!  Es gibt so viele Märchen, doch oftmals kennt man sie nur vom Hörensagen oder in veränderten Versionen. Nun wollen wir einige der Märchen hier gemeinsam lesen.  Wie mache ich mit?  > Jeder kann mitmachen! Ob du nun an der Werwolf-Runde teilnimmst oder nicht, ist egal (Du weißt nicht, was ich damit meine? Schau doch *hier* vorbei)  > Das praktische an dieser Leserunde ist: Ich muss keine Bücher verlosen, aber ihr braucht die Bücher auch nicht selbst zu Hause haben! Wie das geht? Ganz einfach, die Texte findet ihr online wenn ihr den Links folgt, den in bei den Märchen gepostet habe.  > Die Leserunde startet AB SOFORT und geht bis zum SAMSTAG, den 25. 2. 2017  Besonderheit:  Ihr könnt hier euren "Märchenkunde"-Abschluss bekommen!  Es gibt vier Niveaus auf dem ihr diesen bekommen könnt.  Sowohl von den Grimms, als auch von Andersen haben die sehr geehrte MissSnorkfräulein und meine Wenigkeit 18 Märchen zusammengestellt.  Fühlt euch bitte nicht von der Anzahl erschlagen! Viele der Märchen sich ziemlich kurz. :)  Die Niveaus des Märchenkunde-Abschluss: Je 5 Märchen gelesen: kleiner Hans Je 10 Märchen: Zinnsoldat Je 14 Märchen: Prinzessin Alle Märchen (je 18): Großartige Fee -> Welchen Abschluss bekommt ihr?  Bitte erstellt einen Sammelbeitrag im entsprechenden Unterthema, wo ihr festhaltet, welche und wie viele Märchen ihr gelesen habt.  Am Sonntag, dem 26. Februar gibt es dann um 12:00 Uhr die feierliche Vergabe der Zeugnisse!  Die einzelnen Unterthemen können, wie auch bei jeder anderen Leserunde, zum Besprechen der einzelnen Abschnitte genutzt werden: Wollt ihr dringend was zu dem Märchen loswerden? Inwiefern weicht das Original zu der euch bekannten Version ab? Hat euch das Märchen gefallen? Habt ihr etwas nicht verstanden?  (Dies sind nur Anregungen ^^) 


Last Sunday I took part in a panel at the Writer’s Center titled “The Future of the Book Review,” joined by the Washington Post‘s Dennis Drabelle and the Washington Independent Review of Books‘ David O. Stewart. In advance of the panel, moderator Mia Cortez sent along some questions for discussion. With Cortez’ permission, I’m sharing her questions and my responses below. Some of this is likely old hat for people who spend a lot of time discussing books online, but one thing I learn from going to these events is that there are a lot of people who care about books but who don’t keep up with the universe of blogs and online book-review outlets.

How are book reviews evolving with books in the digital era, and how has technology changed the life of a book reviewer?

The digital age has been an enormous blessing for the consumer: The explosion of tweets, blogs, literary websites, and user-generated reviews means that somebody can gather up a diversity of opinions and use them to efficiently make a decision about a book they’re thinking about reading. And it’s a curse as well: Where do you start? Who do you trust?

For the “book reviewer” as we’ve understood it 10 or 15 years ago, a lot has changed: Their authority and standing doesn’t mean as much. Practically speaking, there are fewer full-time book reviewing jobs out there, and freelance outlets pay less, if they pay at all. Experienced book reviewers can and should trade on their experience and knowledge, but they’ve had to understand that those two things don’t hold a lot of value for many readers.

How have readers’ expectations of book reviews changed? What about authors’ expectations for book reviewers?

In some ways, I don’t think much has changed in terms of readers’ expectations. There have always been people who want thoughtful, essayistic writing about books, and those readers are as well served now by the London Review of Books, New York Review of Books, New York Times Book Review, Harper’s, the New Yorker, etc, as they ever were. For readers who don’t necessarily want that kind of deep-dive into a book—if you just want to have a sense of whether you’d like it or not—you have many more options. This may mean that more people feel that the job of a book review is just to give them a thumbs-up or thumbs-down. I don’t know. I will say that as daily newspapers have cut down their books pages, and cut the lengths of book reviews, they’ve jeopardized their role as a kind of middle place—more nuanced than the quick-hit recommendation of a friend but not as weighty as the literary essay. That’s unfortunate, I think.

Authors have had to broaden their definition of what a “book review” is now, and they have to undertake much of the publicity work for themselves to acquire those reviews. Publishers have cut their budgets and reviews have cut space, so authors have to make themselves more available to blog interviews, call-ins to book clubs, etc. This may hurt the pride of older writers who still feel that a New York Times is the gold standard and can’t differentiate one blog from another, but there’s a net increase in the number of outlets available to review a book (if not an increase in the total audience reading).

What about citizen reviews? How do reviews posted on Amazon & other book sites affect the dynamic?

I should say that I don’t have a wholly negative attitude about Amazon user reviews—they’re useful to get a gloss how people are responding to a book. But—and exceptions abound, I know—I don’t go to Amazon reviewers to be surprised by an insight, impressed by the writing, or provoked into thinking about something in a way I haven’t before.

Have blogs become a significant factor in book reviewing? Do they bring a different element to the equation?

One great thing that blogs have done is removed the Olympian tone of the traditional book review—bloggers are freer to write personally and passionately, play with style, and agitate for better coverage of topics that mainstream outlets ignore. Any book blog that lasts for a while is a reflection of the enthusiasm somebody brings to it—because they’re more likely than not writing for free they’re doing it because they care about books. In the past decade more book review outlets have recognized this and brought bloggers into their ranks. It’s practically axiomatic that the next generation of book critics who’ll write for LRB, NYRB, Harper’s, etc, on a regular basis will be people who started writing about books on a blog.

How is critique in the press by an experienced journalist/book reviewer still important?

Experienced reviewers have a long view on things—they’re less likely to be suckered into thinking something is original, and in turn they can keep readers from being suckered themselves. Experienced reviewers can not only say that a book succeeds or fails, but can articulate the reasons why something succeeds or fails. Experienced reviewers know how to write for a general audience in a way a blogger may not. Experienced reviewers may have a better sense of what’s fair game in a review (style, tone, accuracy) and what’s not (size of advance, cover design). Experienced reviewers have a recognizable name against which you can bounce your own preferences and biases. That’s not to say that online reviewers and bloggers lack those things. But outlets that publish experienced reviewers are explicitly looking for those skills.

How have reviewers adjusted to the changes in the publishing industry? Do reviewers maintain a loyalty to books that come from reputable publishing houses? Are self-published books more heavily scrutinized?

By and large, reviewers still succumb to many of the same problems that made bloggers cranky a decade ago—book-review sections will reflexively cover the big new books by the Roths, Updikes, Chabons, etc, leaving scant room for the debut author (except a heavily hyped one), the small-press novel, the work in translation, poetry, the long-suffering midlist novelist. So not a lot has changed. Given that, the typical self-published book simply doesn’t have a prayer for mainstream press attention. Rightfully so: I’d sooner see press attention for marginalized categories of books that are published by serious houses, Big Six or indie, before covering books where there’s scant evidence that anybody besides the author cared about its existence in the marketplace. The disappointment (if not anger) many self-published authors express at being ignored by newspapers and magazines baffles me. If the traditional publication process wasn’t meaningful to you, why is the traditional reviewing process meaningful to you?

What do you foresee for the future of this industry? Will book reviews uphold their importance and continue to thrive?

As long as we have books, we’ll have book reviews. I think we’ll have an overabundance of them, in fact—if you have a favorite niche category of book, you’ll be increasingly likely to find some kind of online outlet that will give you a satisfying amount of in-depth coverage. What’s up in the air is the kind of book review that might prompt a person who’s never heard of a particular book to consider exploring it. Michael Dirda, for instance, routinely introduces me to books that I hadn’t heard of but which I wish I had the time to read, right now. I think we’re losing the kind of culture of readers who are open to being surprised by something, and we’re losing the kind of outlets and the kind of reviewers who are capable of serving them.

0 Replies to “Yannic Heinlein Bibliography”

Lascia un Commento

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *