Guest Post On Reviewing up @ YAHighway!

Posted on July 11, 2010 by Phoebe 3456 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.phoebenorth.com%2F2010%2F07%2F11%2Fguest-post-on-reviewing-up-yahighway%2FGuest+Post+On+Reviewing+up+%40+YAHighway%212010-07-11+14%3A40%3A29Phoebehttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.phoebeeating.com%2F%3Fp%3D335

Good morning, internet. Please excuse the fact that I have had no coffee yet, but I had to post this post haste: the amazing writers over at the amazing YA Highway gave me the opportunity to write a guest post about critical reviewing. The blog post, called “In Praise of Harsh Words went live this morning. I’m excited! And nervous! And other emotions that can only be expressed with the addendum of exclamation points!

Because I have a tendency to be long winded, there were a few bullet points that didn’t make the cut. Since they’re relevant, I figured I’d post them here (in no particular, and in particularly scattered, order):

• Peer reviewing is all over the place in other disciplines–and even other genres. If you’re a scientist, your work won’t even be published if it doesn’t pass muster with other scientists. In this case, your peers aren’t only your critics but also your publishers. Scary! But it’s understandable. Who can better speak to the quality of work in a discipline but those also working in a discipline? As for other genres, when I proofread reviews over at Strange Horizons, I always give the authors’ notes a once-over. These reviews, sometimes critical, always somehow qualified, are often written by other writers. “So-and-so has short fiction appearing in many magazines” or “So-and-so is working on a novel.” It’s incredibly common, but, for whatever reason (probably warm fuzziness), that same critical exchange doesn’t happen in YA–and I think that’s a bit of a shame.
• James Joyce is just one of many examples of writers who have been given near-immortality through criticism. I’ve seen people object even to quasi-academic analysis of YA works. This ignores the fact that academic critics are our friends. When scholars raise objections, perhaps, to its failures as a feminist text, or talk about what is, or isn’t Marxist about a book, they look at it exceedingly closely. They buy copies of it. They give it depth that may or may not have been present previously, and invite others to look at a work deeply, too. I keep thinking back to my Joyce & Cultural Studies class in graduate school, where the professor told us that the big issue at that moment in Joyce studies was the interpretation of a single metaphor in Ulysses. I think that we should all be as lucky as Joyce to have scholars so engaged in our work! And a century after writing it, too. Zombie Joyce, you know?
• Something along the lines of: “Critics aren’t our enemies, boy. You know who we should fear? Censors.” Poorly paraphrased. I first read a line something like that in Katie Waitman’s phenomenal The Merro Tree when I was about 15, and it’s stuck in my mind ever since. Don’t be scared of critics who want to talk about your book–be scared of the people who want to keep it off the shelves.
• With all that said, I know that some writers will always hate critics. I’ve seen it first-hand: Franz Wright has paid my blog a visit because of a mere mention of my former teacher, William Logan. Logan’s known as “the most hated man in American poetry” thanks to his reviews, and has received death threats. So there’s that. But I still think William is genuine about his opinions–his reviews are fair assessments of his tastes (even if mine are wildly different from his). For me, these risks feel worth it (though I’m not as big or as important as Logan, and I’m just starting out in my career so maybe I’m wrong so who the heck knows?) in exchange for being honest, for being fair and balanced in my reviews, for the sake of being able to talk as both a reader and a writer.

So there you go. Thanks again to the wonderful Kirsten Hubbard (who I “met” through reviews, donchaknow? See, they’re already good for something!) and all of the ladies over at YAHighway for the opportunity.