It’s approaching the end of 2007, and like 2006 and 2005 before it (and I would assume going quite a bit farther back than that), lists of the “best” books of the year have been cropping up all over the place. Generally speaking, I’m a list person. I like to see what other folks enjoy and how they organize and reflect on those things; the season of lists is a perfect opportunity for that. It’s also a perfect opportunity for bloggers (you know who you are) to get up in arms about the fact that nobody reads books from small publishers, that nobody reads enough women writers, enough writers of colour, enough writers who write in languages other than English, blah blah blah. It’s been suggested that the writers and editors who compile these lists for major newspapers are always thinking of the bottom line, and therefore want to promote the most middle of the road, lukewarm-but-sells-well pap in their lists. It may be naive of me to say so, but I disagree; I think those lists are compiled honestly. And here’s why: one does not rise to the top of the critical heap (and by that I’m referring to becoming an editor of a particular newspaper or magazine’s book reviewing department, not some sort of academic position) by having taste that is wildly unconventional or by deviating in some huge way from the middle ground. The critics who do that stay critics; nobody in their right mind would give them control over a newspaper’s book review section. Would the level of discourse go up? For sure. Would some under-appreciated, lesser-known books get attention? Hell yeah. Would the Average Joe Reader go and get his book news from somewhere that actually targeted the Average Joe Reader’s taste instead? You know it. So there you have it. Whine and complain all you want, if the cream ever does really rise to the top, it’s only so somebody more down to earth can skim it off before it spoils the rest of the milk. Or something.
Anyway, what I really wanted to say is that this week That Shakespeherian Rag is publishing a list series, where a bunch of writers and editors and bloggers wax poetic about their favourite reads of 2007. It’s called Favourite Books of 2007 (natch), and so far has seen contributions from Brenda Schmidt, Zachariah Wells, Corey Redekop and myself. It’s an interesting peek into what people are actually reading, and I hope you’ll check it out.
