I guess I don’t see why it’s either-or. Why can’t I get book suggestions from literary blogs and friends’ blogs and monthly periodicals and Library Journal and the Chronicle of Higher Ed and the smart 20-somethings in the black t-shirts at Strand Bookstore and NPR and newspapers too. My only point, when I blogged about this myself, was that newspaper book review sections have been a key element in the literary ecosystem and I worry about the whole system being diminished when they’re gone.

I plan to post about how my workshop buddy and I spent several minutes fuming over “that Alice Munro,” for being so famous and everything.

Or, in Canada, make sure your book tour includes an interview on CBC Radio. In the old days, a ten-minute chat on Morningside with Peter Gzowski would guarantee best seller status. And in Canada, all books are “local”, since the population of Canada is roughly that of California.

Oh, and why isn’t there a “Preview” option for my comment?

Two responses: newspapers do sell books, but then again, they don’t sell what they don’t review. It’s great that Michelle Richmond’s “The Year of Fog” could do so well in the Bay Area, thanks to the tradition in that neck of the woods of reviewing local writers. Same with such treasures as Lewis Buzbee’s “The Yellow-Lighted Bookshop” and Karl Soehnlein’s “World of Normal Boys” (MFA nepotism alert!). But how many “local” review sections devoted a disproportionate amount of space to Norman Mailer’s latest book?

Also, without touching the issue of whether newspaper reviews are done “well,” my point here is that the campaign is a tad solipsistic. Reach out to readers and librarians and ask their input. You want some good book sales? Get a starred review in Booklist or Choice.