What's the point of identifying the top 20 most annoying book reviewer clichés unless you can have a bit o' fun with them?
Keeping a running tally as you read through the week's reviews/book jackets/gushing publicity sheets of the number of times books are referred to as a "tour de force" or "compelling" or "readable" (shudder) is certainly one source of amusement. It's a well that just won't run dry.
Playing Bingo with those clichés, however, ups the ante into realms of, hithero, untrod delight.
Just because I'm a sucker for you guys, I've taken all the work out of it: you'll find, below, eight Bingo cards specially designed for the cliché-intolerant among us. I even gave you a freebie -- see the middle square? It's the "Cliché -free" zone.
Print them out. Distribute them among your reading fellows. See who can get to Bingo first. Or -- depending on which publication you're reading -- who can get a blackout first. (Playing for a blackout will absolutely be a requirement when reading some publications. I mean, what's the fun of playing Book Review Bingo when everyone gets a Bingo in the first two reviews?)
Wallow in the joy of artificially inflated, knee-jerk, ultimately meaningless book reviews. Clichés have never been so much fun.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
It may seem that I've embarked on a freakish One Woman Crusade against the book review cliché.
You would be correct in that assumption.
I hardly think there is anything that drives a stake into the heart of a book review faster and with more determined force than a cliché. Book reviews that use clichés mean nothing, say nothing, and tell the reader nothing. They're like eating a cream puff when what you really want is prime rib -- they're unsatisfying and, ultimately, useless.
And, at a time when book reviewers are busy whining about how nobody cares about books and nobody reads reviews and everyone is just a dope, you'd think the FIRST thing to go would be the meaningless clichés. But they're still there, draining the meaning out of anything the writer might have to say. Making what they write a bunch of useless exercises in syllabic combinations.
Why SHOULD anyone read what a book reviewer has to say if they're not saying anything worth reading?
Remember back when I tossed about the idea of starting the Excellence in Cliché Usage Awards? I didn't give the idea up; my life just sort of -- fell apart (see here for more sordid details). While I am not much more together than I was then, I am just as determined to get the book review cliché tarred and feathered, drawn and quartered, and burnt at the stake. And driven out of the book review world completely.
The Excellence in Cliché Usage Awards have been revamped and revitalized into -- ta-da! -- the Reviewerspeak Awards. The results of each month's tallies will be published here on the first of each new month, with the annual award-winners publicly announced (or humiliated) on April 1st every year. Not because it's a joke, but because it will probably seem like a joke that such clichéd writing still exists.
Why am I doing this? To make other reviewers look bad? To make myself look better? Hardly. I am unintelligent, unqualified, un-everything and know it. The one thing I do know,though, is that, unless we book reviewers quit with the knee-jerk reviewerspeak, we will lose the hearts and minds of everyone who is even remotely partial to the Great Literary Discussion. Which would be more than sad -- it would be a tragedy.
So, watch yourself, book reviewers. Get lazy and use those clichés with caution. I will find you. I WILL.
Good-bye to Fifth Avenue; Or, duck, folks! Here comes literary diversity -- finally
Confession time: books I should love...but, for some reason, I hate
Lizzie Skurnick's Shelf Discovery and confessions of a nerdy and ungirly girlhood
An unprivileged reader reviews The Privileges by Jonathan Dee
Reality -- it's what's for dinner: a review of Reality Hunger by David Shields
How to learn to love Ulysses for anti-Joyce-ites
How to overcome poetry phobia: A 3 step plan for those averse to verse
10 authors every Jane Austen fan should read
A lament for the death of literary humor
Top 10 books people lie about reading
10 best audiobook productions ( so good, they make the print versions seem almost boring)
Men are from Dune, women are from Pemberley? Leaping recklessly into the literary gender gap
10 best basic cookbooks and why cookbooks are still important in the age of the Internet
Comments
Is "an American treasure" in there? Also hate "grabs you by the short hairs."
Here are three that just occurred to me: "tarred and feathered," "drawn and quartered," and "burnt at the stake."
Touche, Mr. Welch. (Add "touche" to the list as well).
But that brings up an interesting point -- is a cliche used in the interest of being snarky about other cliches as egregious a sin as a cliche used in a book review in all seriousness?
Or do they kind of cancel each other out, like x's on two sides of an algebraic equation?
Mr. Cihlar: "an American treasure" and "grabs you by the short hairs" have officially been added to the List of Doom.
"If you only read one book this year. . ." Who the hell makes a point of only reading one book a year?
Also: "author" used as a verb.
This is so cute (and not much more than that), but it's also a little disingenuous and, in spite of the protests to the contrary, self-serving. Many of the so-called cliches listed here are just commonly used words; it's as intelligent as saying "algorithm" and “variable” are "cliches" among mathematicians. True in a way, but vapid.
Come to think of it, this blog post itself is riddled with its own cliches: "freebie," "knee-jerk," "award-winners," "stake into the heart" (your token vampire reference?), “publicly announced” (nice tautology, that one), “draining the meaning,” “ultimately meaningless,” and “lose the hearts and minds.” If it’s not okay to use “timely” in a review, why is it okay to use “unsatisfying” in your review of reviews?
It would be easier to take this post more seriously is if this self-appointed reviewer of reviewers weren’t a cliche-diseased writer herself. And for the record, I’m not a professional reviewer, just a reader who likes "readable" books.
Michelle, you are kicking us all in the cliches and it hurts.
Whenever I review a book (although it's been awhile) I always think of that title of Martin Amis' book: "The War Against Cliche." It's a never-ending battle.
If you read a book by a master of prose who is writing at the top of his game ... it's so hard not to call the book "masterful" or to avoid saying he's working at the top of his game, eventhough I've never liked that phrase. It makes me think of the writer in question (Alice Munro, let's say) wearing a Dodgers uniform and running the bases.
D.C. Smith, I can tell you're NOT a reviewer. How? You used your name. We all know who D.C. Smith is... Right? Let me guess, you write a two-bit (cliche???) review article, and you hate to think. So you grab all the cliches, mix 'em up in a bag, then pull 'em out and poof, you've got a review. No thinking, no substance, no value. And you get paid for it. Wow! Are you hiring???
Woohoo! We have our first candidate for the Examiner's “Reviewerspeak Awards”!
“fast-moving action”
“inside look” / “from the inside”
“one of the most fascinating reads of all time"
“inspirational account"
“hair-raising read”
“A detailed look”
“fascinating”
“bang up job”
“A real gem”
“Interwoven throughout”
BINGO!
Yep, you'll find every one of these in Michelle Kerns's recent round-up of the top-20 sports books.
I'm kinda reminded of those annoying people who lecture you about English usage with essays chock-full of grammatical errors and typos.
@Doug: "author" used as a verb comes up EVERY time I write about book reviewer cliches. How...poignant.
@Mr. D.C. Smith: My, my, aren't we the cranky firebrand? First off, the words included on the cliche list are ones that are used as substitutes for meaningful writing. I know this full well since I DID this for some time before realizing what I was doing. Writing without cliches is freaking HARD. Take the cliches out and -- guess what? -- you actually have to forward a rock-solid opinion. There is no room for equivocation when empty words are deleted from the word bank.
@Mr. Welch: Alice Munro in a Dodgers uniform? Dear me. And I thought I had an overactive imagination. But I take your point, sir. Nicely said.
@Mr. Watts: Now, now. Let's play nicely, children.
@Ms. Foster: You, my sweet, deserve your own comment box.
Ms. Foster,
How I admire your interest in the cliche. Particularly when it comes to my writing.
Let's get one thing straight, you and I: I have never once claimed to be an exceptionally great writer. I know I am not. But I know who is (and the Reviewerspeak Awards will bear this out, believe me).
If there is one thing I trust in, however, it is the power of the written word to change how people think about, feel, and perceive their world. What upsets me about cliches is that they muddy this communication -- they don't help it. They stand in the way of the writer communicating honestly with their readers. Cliches are a crutch that let the writer hide what they really think and prevent readers from knowing what they need to know about a work.
The words I chose for my List of Doom weren't just randomly picked: they were words that, after a good deal of experience, I came to recognize as words that were used to fudge meaning.
(continued from below, because I'm a wordy sort of gal)
I'm not dissing particular words just because I want to (though that's fun, too). I'm dissing them because, when they're used too much, they lose their meaning and fail to tell readers anything useful. When that happens, what's the point? Say something useful, people. Or shut up. And I mean that in the best possible way: everyone has something useful to say about what they've read. Most of the time, they're just afraid to do it.
Where the heck is luminous?
This morning I read a review of a new TV show, Justified, that used both "x meets y" AND "May/December marriage."
I happened to find this article delightful. Or: This unflinching expose brings to light the hackneyed turns of phrase that are all too common in the book reviewer’s milieu. The prose is at once tongue-in-cheek yet haunting, deceptively simple yet multilayered.
Be sure to check out the blog "A Chair, a Fireplace, and a Tea Cozy." She's risen admirably to the challenge in ways never seen before.
These come to mind: satisfying, page turner, must read, beautifully rendered.
Thank you Michelle! I have been "lost for words" and finally I found your article. Being reviewer is hard work and you made it a bit easier for all of us ;=)
I read a few reveiws about the bookish movie Alice in Wonderland.
While I didn't notice any cliches, I did notice that not many people thought it was a good movie. Despite these bad reveiws, I still saw the movie..which leads me to wonder, cliches or no cliches, do reveiws even matter? Does it matter that I don't know how to spell reveiws??
I should add that reveiws really DO matter to me...I'm just wondering about everyone else.
Surely whether these words are clichés depends on the context. "Epic" and "lyrical", for instance, are perfectly respectable if used in their proper (narrower) sense rather than the bastardised usage that has become commonplace ("a big, long story" and "pretty language" respectively).
As sympathetic as I am and understand the idea, I think some of the words mentioned are used frequently because there are few good alternatives and the words actually have meaning to someone. For a readers' advisory question, it helps to know someone considers a book a "page-turner." Perhaps another approach is if the same reviewer keeps using the same words, you know you have a deficient reviewer.
Nicole--I have been managing a movie theater for 20 years, and I can tell you that--for movies at least--reviews don't matter nearly as much as word-of-mouth. A movie is either a crowd-pleaser or it isn't. If people love a film and tell their friends to see it, then it will be a hit despite mediocre or bad reviews (e.g. "My Big Fat Greek Wedding"--one of our all-time biggest draws). Contrariwise, if the public finds a film "boring" or "depressing" or "hard to understand" than it will not be a hit, even with great reviews (e.g. "The Hurt Locker" which played for one week to tiny audiences when it first came out last year.) Word-of-mouth is even more powerful than advertising--no amount of hype will force audiences into a theater if a film doesn't appeal to them, while word-of-mouth can turn a film with no publicity into a "sleeper hit." This is for movies--does anybody here know if this applies to other forms of entertainment (books, for instance?)
I don't disagree with Doug, but I'm the opposite of the moviegoer he describes. For me, personally, my own viewing and reading choices tend to be shaped at least somewhat by critics, although I often disagree with them. In general I think they pay more attention to the quality of the movie than the average Joe, whose criteria may largely be a matter of impulse.
Loved this, the idea of it, the original delivery, the prospect of playing a new game! Thanks, Michelle, you are one cool chick.
And true, you do have to sometimes make the mistakes in order to recognize them. Good for you for recognizing them and having the kahunas to point them out. And again, with such a fun delivery.
I have one to add (and I've probably done this myself once or twice, too, but hey, we learn by doing, right?):
"fast-paced caper/thriller/whodunit" "that is sure to thrill/entertain/delight readers of all kinds/ages/ilk" I mean, really. What the heck does that say? Has anyone ever read a slow-paced book of any kind?
@Doug ha! good one!
I loathe the use of this comment section to hurl projectiles of unfortunate disdain at the person who puts herself out there continually. Can you do better?
I love "readable." This is akin to reviewing a restaurant and saying the food is "edible."
Thanks, this is great!
Would you please review this amazing book I read??? Kim Mathers: Beyond the Lyrics
This is the best Kim Mathers/Eminem book on the market, today! This book shares a personal outlook of the life of Kim Mathers with Detroit rapper Eminem. This book discusses both Kim and Eminem's struggles with abuse, infidelities, addiction, suicide, freedom of speech and what the future holds, as well as interesting Kim Mathers facts. This is a book every Eminem and/or Kim Mathers fan will love!
Whether you love or hate her, Kim Mathers, this is one book you will truly appreciate. It is a must read! I highly recommend this book to everyone, fan of not! Job well done Nicole and Glory. I look forward to your next release!
To purchase a copy of Kim Mathers: Beyond the Lyrics, visit:
Paperback ($8.95)
http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/kim-mathers-beyond-the-lyrics/1612...
eBook ($5.99)
http://www.lulu.com/product/file-download/kim-mathers-beyond-the-lyrics/...
For more on Nicole Roger and Glory Rhodes, Visit: http://www.rogersandrhodes.weebly.com
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!