What’s wrong with Globe? Fine, people have obvious disagreements with the concept of the Quill Awards (I think it’s a marketing ploy), but the author of this article makes it out like the naysayers are a bunch of pansies with their panties in a twist.
Plus, what’s going on here?:
”There were snobs and cynics when Oprah Winfrey had her book club, yet Oprah did more for American literature than Edmund Wilson or Alfred Kazin,” said Alan Cheuse, book reviewer for National Public Radio. ”What’s the worst that can happen, that someone in a trailer with her hair in curlers will be lying in bed reading a romance novel? But if her kids are watching her do that, they’ll develop the habit of reading books.
”That would be terrific.”
The weird thing about that, is that Oprah doesn’t even recommend romance novels. I think there’s some selective editing going on in that section. Alan Cheuse is probably thinking, “wow, I sound like an idiot in that quote.”
Amanda’s right on the mark. I believe I said to Mehegan that Oprah was IN HER OWN WAY doing something as important for American fiction as Kazin and Wilson did back in the old days when literary critics held some sway with the reading public.
I am willing to blame the Globe completely for selective editing. That paper gets me riled up! Alan, I would love to have read your comments in full. Too bad they had a sloppy editor.
I bristled at that statement myself. I’m not an Oprah basher but I was ready to do battle over assigning her more credit than the likes of Edmund Wilson. I’m glad to get Alan Cheuse’s clarification here.