The encounter between you and Hans Goedkoop at "De Balie" in Amsterdam a few years ago remains in my memory as one of the best interviews taken from you ever.
You obviously make a great effort to make your lessons as interesting as you can. It makes me jealous.

@ Jan, Margot and others

Enjoy the secret reading tonight. Keep me updated.

Good buy

I loved Goedkoop's book formentioned by Arnon. It is a good buy, which is a poor translation, a poor joke of his surname.
Hans Goedkoops descision to quit the bookreview business was a brave one. Authors reviewed by this man should take notice of what he wrote; I felt he was wright on the nose peeking into those brains and souls who wrote all these works.

Wright on the nose

Wouter, you are definitely wright on the nose.
Pity you will NEVER be right on the nose.
Maybe, just maybe, one day you will probably be rite on the nose.

Well let him

I don't think Mr Goedkoop makes any sense. A book review, even a bad one, is free publicity. I assume most authors want people to actually buy and read their work. If not, why bother being an author?

Why does a review have to be connected to "life"? Whose "life"? Or looking at it another way: how can anything not be connected to "life"? Are book reviewers "dead"?

If Mr Goedkoop wants to throw his own reviews down a well, well let him!

Carlos

I cannot speak on behalf of Mr. Goedkoop, but if literature is trying to say something meaningful about reality (and that’s what literature should do among other things) the reviewer should try to make this connection as well.
The review and the novel can become a closed system where there is no “life” anymore, where the reviewer is just checking if the novel is living up to his or her standards. In other words the true reading experience is killed in this process.

Arnon

A few weeks/months ago I heard Barber vd Pol say that a reviewer has to answer three questions in writing a good review:
1. What point does the author want to make?
2. Does the author succeed in this?
3. What do I think (is peculiar) about the book?
Would that cover your thoughts about a good review? If not, what questions are important in your opinion?

Meaningful?

Is there a difference between meaningful and interesting? Interesting I can handle, meaningful seems overloaded. But if they are the same (or congruent) that can work.

Arnon

Mr Goedkoop is making the mistake many reviewers, critics and art gallery owners make: he thinks he has an influence on the creation of the art itself. He forgets he is just another member of the audience. I would be very much surprised if you write your books with the reviewer in mind.

The taster cannot poison the dinner because the taster is not in the kitchen. The only thing the taster can do is tell others the dinner tastes bad. Since there are usually several tasters who promptly disagree on how the dinner tastes, it is up to the guest to decide how the dinner actually tastes.

To Carlos Dee

The protagonist of this blog has remarked in the past that the perception of a previous novel influenced the writing of the second.
If I recall correctly this was in Humo around the time ‘De Joodse Messias’ came out.

Carlos

The taster is there to discover if the food is poisoned. If he turns ill or dies, the meal will not be consumed by his client.

I don't see how a review, or as you say 'the culture of contemporary book reviews' has an effect on literature to say something meaningful about reality.

A book is one thing. A review is another.

Whether or not a book (or anything that is said or written) says something meaningful about reality is, I think, a different subject. Let's not mix those things up.

The same goes for the question of whether or not a book _should_ say something meaningful about reality. It's a different matter.

But what I have difficulties with is the statement that reviews have an effect on that. How on earth can a review change the content or intention of a book? Regardless of how it is or should be interpreted. And regardless of the capability of a reader to recognize bad journalism.

I can see that a review can influence a reader, but if that is the problem, than maybe we should refrain from giving any comment about any book at all. That should not only go for journalists but for everyone. Because in the end, most of what is said, is one opinion after the other thrown down the well.

I don't know Hans Goedkoop very well, but I'm slightly tempted to read the book you mention. But that's only because I suspect your paraphrasing is a bit sloppy. And if I buy that book, I hope I'm right on that.

AT this moment I am a little bit drunk, and reading "the well" reminds me of the song by Borat: "Trow the jew down the well. (trow the jew down the well) so my country can be free (so my country can be free)" etc/

Carlos

A reviewer can influence the reader, not only can he influence the reader to buy or not to buy the book, this is in this discussion a minor detail, he can influence the reader how to read the book.

Mr Panzer

A book culture without reviews (i.e. an attempt at serious discussion is not a thriving book culture.
I don’t think Mr. Goedkoop is making the point that all comment or opinions on a certain novel are equally worthless.
If I made you curious enough to read his book I did my job.

Arnon

Speaking for myself, I read various reviews (especially the ones on Amazon) and make up my own mind. I don't think a reviewer instructs a reader on how to read a book. It is always clear that it is the reviewer's opinion. In any case, what is the alternative? And if there is no alternative, what exactly is Mr Goedkoop's point?

Incidentally, I am sure many paid-for reviews are not very fair. For a start, reviews don't pay well. Also the reviewer is reading a book he or she may have not actually chosen to read at that particular time. I sometimes even suspect the reviewer hasn't even read the book at all, but has made a summary of other reviews to meet the deadline. Perhaps this is why I enjoy the Amazon reviews much more. They make no claim to be objective. They are simply the readers' reactions to the book.

A more serious problem for the public's perception of a book is when a book is turned into a movie. For example, TC Boyle's "Road to Wellville" is an excellent and entertaining historical novel. The movie, however, was a real rotten tomato. People who saw the movie probably had no inclination to read the book.

Will people be able to read JM Coetzee's "Disgrace" in the same way, once the movie version has implanted visual images in their minds?

Jeanette

According to Arnon, Mr Goedkoop wrote that the "taster is poisoning the dinner". This is different. (Unless the taster is poisoning himself. ) Neither the "taster" nor the "well" metaphors are very good ones.

Carlos

A taster can very well poison the dinner or the lunch for that matter.

Arnon

So if the author fails to connect with "life", the reviewer is to blame? Is this what you are really trying to suggest? It sounds like a big cop-out to me.

Carlos

Please read carefully: we are speaking about Hans Goedkoop's book. Second: his metaphors might me more apt than you seem to think. Third: maybe you should read his book before we continue this discussion? If you cannot read his book, because you cannot read Dutch I'm willing (hesitantly though) to elaborate on what I believe Mr. Goedkoop's position is.

I do not have the idea the literature does not say something meaningful about reality and a book review adds nothing to this supposed inability. But I agree, a reviewer can kill or boost a selling at least temporary - there are simply so much books available.
Further, if you are not ready for the story, the story can never change nor influence your life.
(But maybe Hans Goedkoop was referring on the influence of literature on reality, on public daily life in general, and I think it is very weak, nonexistent).

Mr. Grunberg

Could you please elaborate on Mr. Goedkoop's position and particullarly on his affirmation that literature can't say anything meaningful about reality?

Calisha

Again: Mr. Goedkoop's position is that literature has problems saying something meaningful about reality, this doesn't mean that literature cannot say anything meaningful about reality.

Arnon

I will look for Mr Goedkoop's book. I've read a few pieces on the internet about his views.

If you reduce the question to whether (or not) literature can say something meaningful about reality, then of course it can. But it is the reality perceived by the author. The perception of reality is subjective. But reality is also a continuum - it is impossible to have a reality outside of (a greater) reality - so any work is a facet of reality.

In my opinion, an author or an artist is an observer of reality. So one could view a work of art as a reaction to reality. However, this does not mean that a work of art needs to say anything meaningful about reality. "It doesn't say anything about reality" is the sort of stupid remark one could expect from an ignorant American tourist, or a fascist, or even perhaps a self-important reviewer.

It is possible that framing the argument in terms of "reality" leads us up the wrong path. "Emotions" might well lead to a more interesting discussion. A work of art speaks to the emotions of its audience. And indeed much writing fails dismally in this regard.

Mr. Grunberg

I was wondeing where this point of view comes from. What experience/s made him think that way?

Carlos

The word "reality" can cause confusion. I believe that a novel in order to be effective should say something about the reality of the reader(!).
Do all texts say something about the reality of the reader? Not really. For a real reading experience the reader has to believe, has to feel, has to reach the conclusion that the book he is reading has something to do with his life.

Calisha

If you can read Dutch please read his book. I cannot speak on Mr; Goedkoop's behalf.