And You, Michiko, Are Ostensibly a Literary Critic, Not a Sleazy Hollywood Producer Pitching to Executives

Michiko Kaukutani: “Junot Díaz’s “Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao” is a wondrous, not-so-brief first novel that is so original it can only be described as Mario Vargas Llosa meets ‘Star Trek’ meets David Foster Wallace meets Kanye West. “

Wait a Minute: Michiko Actually LIKES Fiction?

It’s quite possible that the folks at the New York Times were sitting on this obit for a while, waiting for Styron to kick the bucket. After all, Vincent Canby’s infamous Bob Hope obituary appeared three years after Canby himself had expired. Even so, it’s something of a shock to see that Michiko actually liking a novelist. Go through her archives and you’re not going to find a rave for a fiction book until her February review of Dana Spiotta’s Eat the Document.

So what are we to make of this? Is this a critic who can no longer feel the thrills of ficitve immersion? I’m not against negative reviews (far from it). And Michiko has had no problems these days passing plaudits for nonfiction books.

I’m not asking for Michiko to turn into a Harriet Klausner. But when a critic goes nine months without actually liking anything, one must ask why she bothers to cover fiction in the first place. Sure, there are a lot of dogs out there right now. (Lisey’s Story, I’m looking at you!) But this being the autumn publishing season, there are any number of books to be enthusiastic about right now.

Don’t Undersell It or Anything, Michiko

New York Times Corrections: “The Books of The Times review on Saturday, about ‘State of Denial’ by Bob Woodward, referred imprecisely to the number of American military casualties in the Iraq war. While the number killed is more than 2,700, the number of casualties — killed, wounded and missing — as of Sept. 28 was 23,175.”

Antikakutani

I think Scott’s onto something by offering alternatives to Michiko Kakutani’s reviews. But I think a simple international symbol will suffice:

nomichiko.jpg

Speedy Gonzales Roundup

Anne Tyler: Unwavering Instigator of Irritation

Michiko on Joe Ezterhas: “As for the rest of this ridiculously padded, absurdly self-indulgent book, the reader can only cry: T.M.I.! Too Much Information! And: Get an editor A.S.A.P.!” What the F.U.C.K. is up with the A.C.R.O.N.Y.M.S.?

A new book will explain the seven most important unsolved math problems. One of them involves working out the probability ratio for the Democrats in November.

How the hell did the Washington Times snag a review copy of the $3,000 Ali book? Did the reviewer have to fill out a loan application and submit a credit report?

The new issue of the resurrected Argosy is out. It’s the first issue since 1943, with work by Jeffrey Ford, Michael Moorcock, Ann Cummins and Benjamin Rosenbaum. Each issue will be packaged in two volumes: one the main magazine, the other a novella. The magazine is printed bimonthly and has an affordable subsciption rate. The Moorcock story is the return of metatemporal detective Sir Seaton Begg.

The Age weighs in on the legacy of long novels, but cites Tolkien and Patrick O’Brian instead of David Foster Wallace and Rising Up and Rising Down.

Bookslut has posted the standard response the Times is issuing.

Christopher Paolini: the next J.W. Rowling?

A.S. Byatt weighs in on the Grossman translation.

The Globe and Mail reports that Tyler “hasn’t a boring or irritating word in her vocabulary.” Of course. You can find the boredom and the irritation in the Caucasian malaise and the treacle.

And Radosh and Slate are looking into the reliability of that Times sex slave story.