I subscribe to the New York Review of Books, and yesterday I came across a book review written by Margaret Atwood. A lot of you may know that I am a massive Margaret Atwood fan and am slowly working my way through all of her books.
The book she reviewed is called Anthill by EO Wilson. Now I have never heard of EO Wilson, although apparently, he is one of the big wigs in entomology (ant science? - I am sure that I am displaying my ignorance now!). This is his very first novel, and it's about... you guessed it, ants.
Now, if someone else had reviewed this book, someone that I didn't know, I probably might not have even read the review. But because it was Margaret Atwood, I read it immediately, and I now want to read the book. Why? Because it was reviewed by Margaret Atwood, and I loved her review. The book itself sounds alright, but otherwise isn't really my thing.
What do you think? Is there something wrong about choosing a book because of its reviewer? Or does it not matter? Do you think an author would be upset to know that it was the reviewer of their book that attracted you to their book?
Originally posted 24 March 2010 Page Turners
No comments