A Small Online Rant

If I'd written this to a newspaper and it had printed it, my AAR blog piece, A Slow Books Addendum, would be called an opinion piece.  When I worked as an editor at the Houston Chronicle and edited the op-ed page, I thought of the people who wrote in as the crazies.  They wrote impassioned pieces about sewers and transportation and what I considered everyday minutia.  Now, as Pogo would say, I are one of them.

But I truly am incensed that a person or group of people can decide what's good and right for the rest of us to read.  It was bad enough when the Literary Canon was compiled by old white guys, but even worse when feminists got involved and decided to be as didactic as their male counterparts.

Where's the new day, new millennium when children are allowed to read what speaks to them?  When we aren't told what's "good" for us and what's "bad" but are allowed to figure that out for ourselves?  So what if I don't pick something you think I should love?  We're both reading.  And thinking.  And that's really the point, isn't it?

Review Background: The Life History of a Reviewer

I've been a book reviewer for most of my adult life.  I started at The Houston Post newspaper where I worked as a librarian and reviewed any books that were assigned to me by the features department.  I met my husband at the Post, but since they had a nepotism policy (ironic because Ovita Culp Hobby's family ran the paper), I applied for a job at the rival Houston newspaper.

When I moved to The Houston Chronicle and worked as a features staffer, I had a multitude of jobs, including reviewing books, movies, and events.  Again, I had no real specialty, but reviewed whatever was assigned to me.