NEWS: This Article Sucks But Your Mom Was "A TOUR-DE-FORCE!" (OR:The Wonderful World of Misquoting)

CULTURE: This Article Sucks But Your Mom Was "A TOUR-DE-FORCE!" (OR:The Wonderful World of Misquoting)

Here's a nice read for a lazy Sunday evening: New York Times frequent contributor Henry Alford has an essay in the Online Sunday Book Review today about the seedy underworld of ridiculous misquoting for book jacket blurbs. Everyone kind of knows that it goes on with movies all the time, with hyperecstatic quotes ranging from cherry-picked to made-up to being taken from Ain't it Cool News, but I'd never given too much thought to what goes on with books. You'd think publishers would be above all that, wouldn't you? Eh, of course not.

The funniest part of the article is the defensiveness with which the editors justify their actions, citing a sort of moral hierarchy to the remodeling of praise (or what passes for it) in which outright making things up is the worst offense, festive sprinklings of exclamation points warrants a sideways glance at most (despite drawing ire from the inimitable Sarah Vowell), and anything else in between is subject to a sliding scale of scorn or condoning.

Yet another reason why the best books are usually described with full, coherent sentences where the number of letters isn't eclipsed by the number of ellipses. Perhaps not "news" per se, and definitely not shocking when you really think about it, but if anything it's just another friendly reminder not to believe every single little thing you read. Especially when it's taken out of context.


"Readers be warned...This Article...is...dictionary...Girls'...finest...tour-de-force...achievement...complex [and] lavish...riveting." ~ Various Artists


Image: New York Times

I like how in your warning there's an ellipsis between dictonary and girl. Just sayin' I noticed that. Also, isn't five words in a row from the review kind of a lot? Maybe three or four is okay. As long as there aren't two or more articles or prepositions in that section.

In high school, I wrote quite a few papers where I would back up my statements with heavy uses of ellipses.

Of course, essays like Silas Marner: Satan worshipping child molester and Ronald Reagan - How a Nazi cannibal became the 40th president never earned me particularly good grades. If only high school teachers were as gullible as shoppers at the airport book stands!

I loved it!

This right here is one of the many reasons why I'm a big fan of yours.

"Hilarious."

I loved it!

Beat me to it.

"Soul Plane is a crowning achievement in aviation-based comedies starring Snoop Dogg" - Joe Schmo from the Douchebag Weekly

Frankly, I ignore any blurb that's not either a) written by an author I know to be consistently good (the idea being that they write what they like to read, so if I like what they write I should like what they read), or b) extensive and clearly intact. And I don't really give any credence to the longer ones as far as book recommendation goes. I use them more as a way to gauge what the book's about (when the summary isn't helpful), or I'll read 'em on a book I've finished and liked as a way of seeing how other people felt about it. (That is, in fact, one of the primary things I do with reviews: see if other people felt the same way I did about something. Silly, I suppose.).

The only blurb that garners an instant grab from me is one from Neil Gaiman. He has *never* steered me wrong.

Incidentally, this goes on with videogames too. I'm particularly fond of when the box quotes preview articles rather than reviews. That's some grade A desperation.

In most cases I agree, but I'd strongly suggest giving Alan Moore's "Lost Girls" a pass if you want to keep that opinion of Gaiman's blurbs.

Well, I'd say it was too late, as I already own it. But then, I rather like it.

wait. you mean people didn't realize that's what the ellipses where for?

I used to try and imagine what was said in the ellipses on book reviews...

. . . would be a "MASTERFUL EPIC" if it weren't just a "POLISHED" turd.

If I were an editor, it would just be SUCK or WIN. No extra words to be taken out of context.

DG, love your articles.

EXPERTS . . . AGREE ! ! !

Any article that refers to Sarah Vowell as "inimitable" is A-OK with me.

Lurved it!

"Private Eye" often has bits about authors doing quotes for each others books; Fred says "Bob's book is marvelous", Bob says "Fred's book is the best thing ever". That's bad, but it gets worse. People provide blurb quotes for their spouses (who happen to be using different pen names) or for their bosses.

Do people buy books because of the praising blurbs on them?