I've concluded that I hate blurbs. They are destructive. They distill all the hot words into very short passages. Consider all these from the back of one new novel I'm reading: "astonishing debut, visionary writer, propulsive, lyrical and intimate, gorgeous, tender, dynamic writer, truly something special." Yuck. Who could achieve such--although it is a very fine novel.
I've concluded that I hate blurbs. They are destructive. They distill all the hot words into very short passages. Consider all these from the back of one new novel I'm reading: "astonishing debut, visionary writer, propulsive, lyrical and intimate, gorgeous, tender, dynamic writer, truly something special." Yuck. Who could achieve such--although it is a very fine novel.
Well, the vast majority of blurbs aren't "real." They come from friends/colleagues of the writer and therefore can't always be trusted. (Of course, the blurbs for George's book CAN be trusted because they all say how fabulous his writing is--and who can argue with that?) I still check a book's blurbs when browsing at a bookstore, but try not to be too influenced.
I've concluded that I hate blurbs. They are destructive. They distill all the hot words into very short passages. Consider all these from the back of one new novel I'm reading: "astonishing debut, visionary writer, propulsive, lyrical and intimate, gorgeous, tender, dynamic writer, truly something special." Yuck. Who could achieve such--although it is a very fine novel.
Well, the vast majority of blurbs aren't "real." They come from friends/colleagues of the writer and therefore can't always be trusted. (Of course, the blurbs for George's book CAN be trusted because they all say how fabulous his writing is--and who can argue with that?) I still check a book's blurbs when browsing at a bookstore, but try not to be too influenced.
I've stopped reading blurbs and scan for names of blurbers--assuming they indicate that if I like their books I will love the current book.