The Lit-Crit Career: It’s All About The Socioeconomics

Esteemed book review editor Teresa Weaver is being fired from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution to help the newspaper cut costs, and John Freeman, president of the National Book Critics Circle, has called for an aggressive public protest. I think this is a great move, and if I were near Atlanta I’d love to join the flash mob that’s planning to assemble outside the newspaper’s main office on May 3.

Freeman has also asked numerous writers and critics to write articles for the NBCC’s Critical Mass blog about why book reviewing is important, but unfortunately this effort has generated some mediocre writing. For instance, this article by Roxana Robinson is one of many that treats online culture as the nemesis of literary criticism. Somehow, instead of addressing the real crisis facing book critics — a failure to find venues that will pay them well — several of these commentators are trying to buttress the “lit-crit” professional class by emphasizing imaginary differences between themselves and the upstart fledgling book critics who write for blogs. This is not a wise way to address the problem.

Fortunately, John Freeman himself has seen the light on this point and reversed some of his own earlier comments. He also posted links to an impressive number of other conversations about the movement he’s kickstarted, and some of this is real good reading. Here is some of the commentary going around. With all these arguments and resolutions and objections bouncing back and forth, what’s the chance that I’ll have something new to say?

Well, I can try. It seems to me that much of this commentary is missing the obvious socioeconomic angle. For most smart, literate people I know, book reviewing was never a career option, because they had to earn a living and could not invest the leisure time needed to enter such a rarefied and unprofitable field. When I graduated college it was understood that I would take complete financial responsibility for myself, and so I began working a full-time job as a software developer. I continued to write in my spare time, and I took writing courses and submitted stories and poems to journals. Once I became a parent, it became that much more clear that I could not prioritize my literary interests anywhere near the top of my list. The kids come first, then the job, and I spent the time I had left trying to write, and trying to get noticed as a writer.

Blogging has made me feel somewhat successful as a writer, even financially (I earn between $400 and $700 a month from those little ads you see on this article page, which isn’t much, but the cash comes in handy). But I can’t even dream of quitting my day job, and to be honest I’m a bit perturbed about the fact that I’ve never had a career path option like “go to a great college, make connections, work as an intern while your parents support you, and then eventually earn enough through your writing that you can afford a place in Brooklyn”.

It’s all about the socioeconomics. I like it when John Freeman writes, in the article above, that too many people imagine book critics to be stuffy snobs with names like “F.D. Rumplemeyer” or “J.R. Woatslittle”. Of course this stereotype is not true, but I do have a feeling that a lot of book critics went to schools with names like “Harvard” and “Yale”.

I think the National Book Critics Circle is doing a good thing by calling attention to the crisis in newspaper book reviews. But blogs are important to the lit-crit equation, not because they’re fast or trendy or interactive, but because people who are writing while scraping to earn a living don’t have the luxury or the time or the connections to establish themselves in print media. We need to get our words out there anyway we can, and if we can get paid for our words by selling some ads, that’s even better. It’s honest work. And unless you can write well and you know what you’re talking about, you’re not going to get linked, you’re not going to get traffic, and you’re not going to sell ads. That’s how “quality control” gets taken care of in the blogosphere.

I’ll support anybody else trying to earn some money by writing, either in print or online, as long as they’re willing to hustle for it. I hope others who get paid to write are willing to support my endeavors too.

3 Responses

  1. Quality Control”And unless
    Quality Control

    “And unless you can write well and you know what you’re talking about, you’re not going to get linked, you’re not going to get traffic, and you’re not going to sell ads. That’s how ‘quality control’ gets taken care of in the blogosphere.”

    Hear, hear! This is the best take I’ve seen so far regarding ads on blogs and you’re absolutely right. It works very similarly to a media model, doesn’t it? The higher the circulation or viewership, the more ads (for higher prices) a newspaper or television station can sell. It’s no different on the Internet.

    The way I see it, many bloggers are entrepreneurs running their own op-ed web sites. The most popular ones are popular because they give readers what they want to read. And if readers want more of it, there’s nothing wrong with selling ad space to keep the operation going.

    On my site, I have to sell ads because I’d never be able to operate it otherwise. My little toy, the Gender Genie, continues to be popular and sucks up quite a bit of bandwidth. Without ad revenue, it would have disappeared a long time ago.

  2. Oh, Richard FordNYT has
    Oh, Richard Ford

    NYT has relatively even-handed coverage of the debate: (though there are noticeably fewer online types interviewed than old-school ones). However, Richard Ford was unwise enough to add his two cents, and ends up owning the two most naive and embarrassing quotes in the piece:

    “Newspapers like The Atlanta Journal-Constitution could run book reviews ‘as a public service, and the fact of the matter is that they are unwilling to,’ said Richard Ford, the Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist.”

    Yes, because if there’s one thing a failing business should do, it’s to start viewing itself as a public service.

    “Of course literary bloggers argue that they do provide a multiplicity of voices. But some authors distrust those voices. Mr. Ford, who has never looked at a literary blog, said he wanted the judgment and filter that he believed a newspaper book editor could provide. ‘Newspapers, by having institutional backing, have a responsible relationship not only to their publisher but to their readership,’ Mr. Ford said, ‘in a way that some guy sitting in his basement in Terre Haute maybe doesn’t.’ “

    Well, yes, that’s the point. Newspapers have a responsibility to their publisher and institutional backing, and those are exactly the people ordering them to cut out the book section. They’re the people most concerned with profits – the last people in the world to consider themselves public servants.

    Ford’s worked at a newspaper before, he should know where all the decisions to cut editorial content come from.

    Oy, what a shame – I really liked Sportswriter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

What We're Up To ...

Litkicks will turn 30 years old in the summer of 2024! We can’t believe it ourselves. We don’t run as many blog posts about books and writers as we used to, but founder Marc Eliot Stein aka Levi Asher is busy running two podcasts. Please check out our latest work!