Sometimes we must try to puzzle out for ourselves why the New York Times Book Review has chosen to review a book. In his review of Mark Sarvas‘s debut, ‘Harry Revised,’ Troy Patterson connects the dots for us: “That you are reading a review of this novel in these pages is a testament to the author’s success as a blogger.” As you might have already guessed, the review isn’t a very positive one.
“Harry does not seem to have been reread, never mind revised,” Patterson writes. ZING! “I will grant you that these days, only chess players seem to use the word ‘gambit’ properly, but Harry is supposed to be infatuated with the game of kings. Other terms that the novelist is pretentious enough to use despite his not knowing their precise meanings include ‘enormity,’ ‘parameters,’ ‘jumper,’ ‘tortuous’ and ‘petty crime.’ The choicest mixed metaphor finds Harry ‘keeping his balls in the air’ while he’s ‘stuck on a roller coaster’ carrying him along by ‘sheer momentum.'”
(photo: Sara Corwin)