I have a love-hate thing with book blurbs.
On the one hand, they can be a window into the experience of reading a book.
On the other, they can be a window into the experience of reading a book—they offer a frame that is not your own.
Nothing makes me feel dumb like not “getting” a book when the jacket is covered in blurbs from notables.
You might ask: What does it matter that I don’t agree with Isaac Asimov or Ursula Le Guin?
Well…nothing at all. There’s no accounting for taste, as they say.
But book reviews don’t present as subjective, individual opinions—they present as a monolithic “they” that considers a book to be great.
It’s pretty one-sided, isn’t it? You don’t find disagreement in the blurbs for a book. No bad reviews in there!
And it’s this monolithic quality they makes me uneasy. It leaves very little room for an open-minded reader.
You may start in on a book with the expectation of its greatness—unfair to everyone involved.
Taylor Coe 