Laura Kipnis on Lynne Tillman

WHILE I AM generally pleased to see so many new bylines in  the New York Review of Books under new editor Ian Buruma, I hope I will not be seeing that of Laura Kipnis often if her review of Lynne Tillman represents her typical approach.

Her first paragraph ends, "I suspect that revering writers does them no favors, but don't worry, this isn't the setup for a hit job." But I say unto you: Worry. This is a setup for a hit job. That sentence is only the first of several instances of disingenuousness.

Far too much of the review is devoted to making an invidious distinction between "downtown" writers, like Tillman, and "uptown" writers, like Kipnis. Uptown writers are rigorously edited while downtown writers are not, Kipnis explains, with the result that downtown writers, who think of themselves as avant-garde and uncompromising, are actually prolix, self-indulgent, and tiresome.

So there, I guess.

This sort of thing just does not belong in the NYRB. Venting is fine in a blog, but in the NYRB I hope to find something a little more cool and considered. I've read many a takedown in the NYRB, but they never had the oniony anti-intellectual rankness that this one does.

And speaking of editing, would "by the ton," "fount of wisdom," "set the world on fire," and "with the best of them" have gotten by Barbara Epstein? No. No, no, no.