.jpg)
In 1984, George Orwell created newspeak, a language "whose vocabulary gets smaller every year."
While newspeak exists only in fiction (or does it....?) an even more pervasive, destructive language-killer has infiltrated the newspapers, news sites, and literary blogs of the world -- reviewerspeak.
The purpose of reviewerspeak is to force every free-thinking book, movie, and art reviewer into the submissive parroting of only a handful of approved reviewer words to describe any item that may come their way. Call it laziness, call it the incessant demands of the ever-wakeful internet, call it fear of the wrath of Harold Bloom, but reviewers -- particularly book reviewers -- spew out these same, tired old clichés with the force and regularity of Linda Blair in a scene from The Exorcist.
The problem of reviewerspeak is not a new one. Strunk and White addressed the bane in The Elements of Style:
The world of criticism has a modest pouch of special words (luminous, taut), whose only virtue is that they are exceptionally nimble and can escape from the garden of meaning over the wall. Of these critical words, Wolcott Gibbs once wrote: '...they are detached from the language and inflated like little balloons.' The young writer should learn to spot them -- words that at first glance seem freighted with delicious meaning but that soon burst in air, leaving nothing but a memory of bright sound.
But how to identify, and avoid, these little balloons of bright sound? Let's take a look at the 20 most annoying clichés book reviewers use (and I am a chief offender here, though I am entering rehab even as we speak) as a substitute for original and substantive thought:
1. Gripping
2. Poignant: if anything at all sad happens in the book, it will be described as poignant
3. Compelling
4. Nuanced: in reviewerspeak, this means, "The writing in the book is really great. I just can't come up with the specific words to explain why."
5. Lyrical: see definition of nuanced, above.
6. Tour de force
7. Readable
8. Haunting
9. Deceptively simple: as in, "deceptively simple prose"
10. Rollicking: a favorite for reviewers when writing about comedy/adventure books
11. Fully realized
12. At once: as in, "Michael Connelly's The Brass Verdict is at once a compelling mystery and a gripping thriller." See, I just used three of the most annoying clichés without any visible effort. Piece of cake.
13. Timely
14. " X meets X meets X": as in, "Stephen King meets Charles Dickens meets Agatha Christie in this haunting yet rollicking mystery."
15. Page-turner
16. Sweeping: almost exclusively reserved for books with more than 300 pages
17. That said: as in, "Stephenie Meyer couldn't identify quality writing with a compass and a trained guide; that said, Twilight is a harmless read."
18. Riveting
19. Unflinching: used to describe books that have any number of unpleasant occurences -- rape, war, infidelity, death of a child, etc.
20. Powerful
The problem with these words is that, when reviewers use them to death (as they have), book reviews cease to have any purpose or meaning.
Here, I'll show you. This is a review of one of my favorite books of all time, Connie Willis' To Say Nothing of the Dog, using all 20 book reviewer clichés:
(1).jpg)
Connie Willis' To Say Nothing of the Dog is a science fiction tour de force: it is at once a rollicking comedy, a fully realized fantasy, and a highly readable yet nuanced page-turner. Willis' deceptively simple prose follows a group of futuristic time-travellers as they attempt to recover "the Bishop's bird stump" for their patroness, Lady Schrapnell, and get embroiled in a riveting adventure in the process. The sweeping story dips into the Victorian era, Medieval Britain, and World War II in a haunting yet timely look at the consequences of tampering with the fabric of history.
To Say Nothing of the Dog takes its title from the subtitle of the Victorian comedy tome, Three Men in a Boat, and Willis' compelling and lyrical writing reads like Jerome K. Jerome meets Dorothy L. Sayers meets P.G. Wodehouse. It is not as poignant and unflinchingly powerful as Willis' previous effort, Doomsday Book; that said, it is a gripping addition to the science fiction genre.
How many book reviews have you read of this ilk, and I'm not just talking about the blogosphere here, but reviews penned in the rarefied atmosphere of the New York Times Book Review? If you're a book lover, probably quite a few.
Now tell me -- can you identify what that book was about from what I wrote? Why I love it above all others? Whether you would like it yourself? How it compares to other science fiction books -- or even any other book on the planet?
No.
Reviewerspeak isn't just annoying: it's a black hole that sucks in meaning faster than I can down a gin martini (no vermouth, three olives). And in an economy with publishers cutting employees quicker than you can type "stimulus package" and book sales diving to Hades, it's time that book reviewers everywhere delete the clichés and start giving readers the unvarnished truth.
I have lavishly and recklessly used almost all of the 20 clichés in the past (thank God I never used tour de force or sweeping or fully realized; then I would really be on suicide watch), however, I've officially sworn off all 20 of these brain-draining clichés and have posted a copy of them directly over my computer where they can stab me in the eye each time I am tempted to describe Nicholas Sparks as readable or Jeffrey Archer's Paths of Glory as gripping.
I hereby extend a challenge to all Book Examiner readers: if you ever see any of these clichés on this site again, immediately email me at michellekerns@surewest.net with the offending sentence and I will buy you a pitcher of Guinness (or whatever adult beverage you prefer). If, however, I catch any of you using one of the clichés in a comment designed to cut me down to size, you will be responsible for my drinks tab. Be prepared.
**Note: Since compiling this list, I'vd added one more unspeakable cliché to Most Hated status, a word that should be tarred and feathered, drawn and quartered, then burnt at the stake: unputdownable.
Did I leave out your most hated book reviewer cliché? Let us know -- leave a comment or email the offending item to michellekerns@surewest.net and I will add it to my list of Things To Never Type Again.
Continue your journey into the Dark Heart of Book Reviewing with What is the purpose of a book review? And are book reviewers writing anything useful? and The Aftermath of The 20 most annoying book reviewer cliches and What's the purpose of a book review?
Comments
Masterful or masterfully
Oh yes. And beautifully, startling, bold, sheer, accessible, memorable, epic, and, "a tale of loss and redemption." The 20 in this piece are only the tip of the iceberg and my personal pet peeves. I've got a list of over 50 that I will kill myself if I ever use again.
How about "sensuously", "seductively", or "lushly described". All those mean that it's way painstakingly detailed to the point of insanity.
I would say your article is a 'must read' for all of your colleagues.
Well written. I love how you write, the aspects you bring out, and the banter you lavish on your articles. You've got spunk, bite, and wit. And most importantly, when you delve into an issue, you have substantive things to say. You don't simply say "OMG, it was like the best book I ever read. Like really!!!" Nor do you don the pointy academic hat, scowl at us commoners, then pontificate how "Thou hast received wisdom at my hands, and have gained the knowledge I imparted...." So you prove that you can have intelligence and remain normal. And if that’s not enough, you're very pretty. Hard to beat.
*tear* Oh, man, I'm so glad I've never done these. Maybe that's why I'll never get quoted in a book's promotion, because these are the only 20 words/phrases that ever seem to get used. KWIM?
You left out "what it is to be human"
I laughed. I cried. Too, too true.
"luminous" takes first place on my list. "Lyrical" is next.
Most hated example of reviewerspeak: "Author" as a verb. For some reason, this is always used in the past tense: "She authored a book." I never read "She has just started authoring a book."
I actually like "lyrical." It is the opposite writing style from "pedantic" or "prosaic." Synonyms would be "evocative" and "poetic." Or are these no-nos as well?
Thank you for addressing egregious sins of reviewing. I believe that a lot of them are committed in the name of cowardice -- that reviewers use these devices to cover up the fact that they're too chicken to render an opinion.
It's awful to read a long, "scholarly" review of a book, and realize at the end that the author has given you zero information about whether it's worth reading. They have, however, delivered 300 carefully chosen words to prove they went to college -- the one piece of information you did not need to know.
What about music reviews? Those are a nice big crock of [website wont let me write word]. Someone should do a piece about those.
Bless you, woman with a brain and a vocabulary.
The reviewers are mostly full of well you know what, and have neither brains nor a vocabulary.
The real problem is even more basic. Most books are badly written. I've been published, and a German translator asked, in all serious, "Do American publishers have editors?" A legitimate question. And it applies to reviewers too. Oh, the overall loss of decent comprehensible language most obvious in this (badly educated) country of ours has made me tear out hair, mine, and finally just give up.
But dear lord, am I grateful that such as you still exist. Thank you a thousand times. GRATEFUL THa
Laugh-out-loud, rollicking roller-coaster.
Okay, you got me. I used one and only one of these cliches. In my defense I've only done 4 reviews. You can't blame me for being new, or you can if you want. I enjoy your articles and I thank you for this one. Rest assured you've converted me. No more cliches for me.
"Provocative"?
Hilarious. My favourite - X meets X meets X. Mostly because whenever they say that, you know the book isn't going to be anything like any of them.
Food-related novels will often be described as a 'sumptuous feast of a story'.
How about gritty?
Pitch-perfect. Astonishing. Stunning. And how come reviewers so rarely say, "this is unreadable crap?"
How about "lends"?
The one that really bugs me is the gushing "I love this BUT..." that always ends with "...I can't recommend it because it has a curse word in it," that comes with YA reviews. Argh. Just tell it like it is - "I'm an overprotective person who honestly thinks my 16 year old hasn't heard the "f-word" before."
Thank God I haven't had any of these words come up in reviews of my book "Sensitivity 101 for the Heterosexual Male." I will pass this article along via facebook and twitter as all authors, mainly us "newbies," need help with "was my review a good one?" and "did the reviewer even read the book?" Seeing these words may alert us...
Philip Nork
author of Sensitivity 101 for the Heterosexual Male
available at amazon.com
I'll admit to using "lyrical" once (for A River Runs Through It, because it really IS lyrical LOL) and I've probably used "that said" a couple of times.
I have a tendency to overuse the words "really" and "interesting." The thesaurus is my friend--I'm trying to broaden my vocabulary.
How nice to see an Examiner article that is opinionated! And it's been twittered and re-routed all over the place. As the New Jersey Day Trips examiner I've been constantly told to write short, newsworthy, third person pieces. Frankly that hasn't helped my ppvs a bit! Glad to see a decent piece of writing on Examiner. I'm going to mention it in mhy blog, www.writersandpublishers.blogspot.com.
p.s. I'm afraid without those cliches the book reviews of the world would shrink considerably. Theater reviewers seem to depend on "luminous" and "resonates" -- at least for dramas and performances.
thanks for the help. i'll refer back to this list often...
Well spoken, Michelle! Very well said. It's very difficult to find well written reviews.
Rats. I've used just about all of these. Time for a new career.
I'm very late to this, but had to make a comment. First, thank you. Second, I'm a reviewer on my own blog, but I try to avoid both cliches and not telling anything about the book. I admit to having used the word lyrical, but usually in regards to something that WAS lyrical. lol.
From personal experience I can say writing a review that's been well thought out and articulate can be a royal pain in the you-know-what, but I try very hard. Sometimes I succeed. Sometimes I fail rather spectacularly. :)
The book you're referring to in your faux-review isJerome K Jerome's 'Three Men in a Boat,' not 'Three Men and a Dog'...
Personally, Michelle, I think your review of To Say Nothing...is a one that makes me want to read the book, "lyrical" or not! ;)
Is it just me? Meaning relies upon context. Although these words and phrases can be rendered meaningless, they can also be used to say something meaningful and precise, if wielded correctly by an articulate writer. Just because some lazy, cowardly writers hide behind these words like a smokescreen doesn't mean that a skillful writer can't use them and use them well.
Anything with enough sex in it - explicit, steamy, romp, raunchy
Anything political/dramatic - charged, taut, woven, layered etc etc
Anything romantic/happy - heart-warming, life-affirming
Anything contain crime - seamy, gritty, underworld,
There's too many to mention...
XYZ "finds him/herself drawn into..."
The only worse place for real, intelligible prose is on the back of a DVD.
I can't believe nobody's mentioned 'writing at the peak of his/her powers', which is also a sin in blurbery.
I'm late to the party, but strictly speaking "X meets X meets X" should be "X meets Y meets Z" because X, Y and Z are different authors. X meets X meets X suggests the same author subsitituted in each case.
For example, "Stephen King meets Charles Dickens meets Agatha Christie" would be X meets Y meets Z, whereas X meets X meets X would mean:
"Stephen King meets Stephen King meets Stephen King"
How could you forget "devastating"?
The best is when the book cover quotes one of these cliches all by itself to prove that it was reviewed by somebody somewhere.
"...luminous..." - Cleveland Plain Dealer
My favorite is when the book is "shot through" with something, often the noun form of one of the others listed here.
This one is (hopefully only) reserved for kids' and teen books, but when the reviewer is referring to a protagonist's uplifting actions: "readers will cheer..." That's one that makes me cringe every time I read it. No they won't, so don't claim they will.
There is NO SUCH THING as a gin Martini with no Vermouth. A Martini is a COCKTAIL which means that it requires more than one alcoholic ingredient. You, my dear are drinking a gin HIGHBALL, which calls for only one alcoholic beverage in addition to any other ingredients (e.g., ice, olives, etc.)
As for the book review thing, I agree that all those words are Poignant as far as I am concerned. But I'll tell you... if I were running the Columbus [Ohio] Dispatch (Sunday edition), I would immediately fire all those supposed book reviewers because once you've read their work, one hasn't a clue (a cliché!) what in the heck the book is all about. These reviews are nothing more than witless literary tributes to their authors. The purpose of a good newspaper is to inform its patrons, not to turn folks into decoding agents for the CIA.
Mah! I could go on for days but I'll spare you.
Love to all,
pat
"Page turner" has some meaning.
Don't forget about "whip-smart."
Plangent contingent
Plangent contingent Limpid
Plangent contingent Limpid
Well written post Michelle, but it could have done without the Strunk & White reference. Never has a book filled with such crap been held in such esteem, especially when it's authors are hypocritical and unable to follow their own advice (because their advice is crap!)
The latest scourge of covers is "unputdownable". Aside from not making sense, I dream of the day I meet the coiner of this term so I can promptly punch him in the face and kick his shins for his sins.
If I ever see "passion" on a book cover or in a review, I stop reading. (Even if it's in a phrase such as "a passion for truth" or "passionate about education".)
Science-fiction and fantasy book reviews often feature something along the lines of "top-notch worldbuilding". You know, because worldbuilding is one of SF/F's required ingredients. Anyway, that set aside, "top-notch worldbuilding" is about as hollow as it gets.
Pages
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!