Comments on: In Which I Talk with Tanenhaus

By: Theater Review: Queens Girl : Edward Champion’s Reluctant Habits

Theater Review: Queens Girl : Edward Champion’s Reluctant Habits — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:49:24 +0000

[...] the dark to force more ink on the pages. Given that I also took notes on Wednesday night during the Barnes and Noble New York Times event and did not use any of them, I think that I will do the same for this piece. But I will present one [...]

By: Blog of The Week 26/1/09 « Annette Dunlea Literary Blog

Blog of The Week 26/1/09 « Annette Dunlea Literary Blog — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 17:58:07 +0000

[...] Champion has a post up In Which I Talk with Tanenhaus — The New York Times Book Review-editor Sam Tanenhaus. Among the points of [...]

By: Eric Rosenfield

Eric Rosenfield — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:23:39 +0000

Yes. I think you should put online somewhere that your recommendations for a better SF columnist were Matt Cheney and Jeff VanderMeer, both of whom would be lightyears better than Itzkoff. You know, in case he forgets the names you told him.

By: DrMabuse

DrMabuse — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:05:17 +0000

True dat, on the Tanenhaus quote. But Tanenhaus did say in our talk outside that he needed to read Levi and me more. The upshot is that he is now relying on his staffers to communicate what is being said about him. I understand where he’s coming from, because keep in mind that he’s editing both the NYTBR and The Week in Review. But this also has the downside of Tanenhaus not being fully informed about what’s going on, or being apprised of pivotal gaps. Such as my remarks to him about how the science fiction community (and readers half-steeped in science fiction) not taking Itzkoff’s uninformed columns seriously, which was apparently news to him.

In any event, like Levi, I thought it was a gentlemanly gesture on his part to approach us in the street after we had approached him at B&N, with icy results. This is the kind of thing that needs to happen more often in the literary community, since all of us in our own respective ways are fighting the good fight.

By: Eric Rosenfield

Eric Rosenfield — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:48:46 +0000

Sorry, he didn’t say he didn’t read it, he implied he didn’t read it.

By: Eric Rosenfield

Eric Rosenfield — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:48:20 +0000

One more thing: “I asked Tanenhaus if he had found any of Levi’s observations helpful. He said no.” He actually said, “No, but that doesn’t mean you should stop doing it.” And, more importantly, he said that he didn’t READ it (and perhaps had never heard of it); you gave the impression that he read it and dismissed it.

By: Eric Rosenfield

Eric Rosenfield — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:46:30 +0000

Ahah, that’s what I was missing. Might want to have pointing that out for those of us not as familiar with the imprints, but whatever, no big deal.

By: DrMabuse

DrMabuse — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:35:21 +0000

Knopf is an imprint of Random House.

By: Eric Rosenfield

Eric Rosenfield — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:31:47 +0000

One thing: You say, “Why had seven of the top ten books of 2008 been granted to Knopf?” and then “in 2008, nine of the ten titles had gone to Random House”. Something’s not right there.

By: Levi

Levi — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:05:17 +0000

I was very impressed that Sam stopped on the street to talk to us, especially since the atmosphere had been a little more stiff when we all spoke at Barnes and Noble. This encounter was long overdue, and I’m so glad it was a friendly one all around.

I’ll post my own interpretation this weekend in my usual NYTBR column …

By: The Knopf Times Book Review : Edward Champion’s Reluctant Habits

The Knopf Times Book Review : Edward Champion’s Reluctant Habits — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:31:37 +0000

[...] of January 21, 2009, I asked Tanenhaus in person about the concerns satirized below, and I was able to get a few answers. I point readers of this post to the direction of my later post, “In Which I Talk with Tanenhaus,” [...]