The Hudson River Valley Reader Book

Addendum to original review, explaining why I have downgraded this to two stars - (italicized material below):

My second criticism is probably more a reflection of my personal taste, and may not be shared by other readers. But I felt that Mary Oliver's background as a poet shone through, with the result that many of the pieces had a kind of "writerly" quality that might appeal to other writers, but was a bit precious for a general reader like me. This was particularly true of pieces like Chris Arthur's "(En)trance", Patricia Hampl's "The Dark Art of Description", Brian Doyle's "The Greatest nature Essay Ever", Cynthia Ozick's "Ghost writers", John Updike's "The Writer in Winter", any of which might be of interest to someone attending a writer's workshop, but none of which seemed to me to hold much interest for a general reader.

And, of course, it didn't help my evaluation that one of the longest pieces in the collection is by Richard Rodriguez, a writer whose self-indulgent posturing and whining gets on my last nerve. In a slim collection that doesn't even exceed 200 pages, the 21 pages devoted to his contribution "the God of the Desert" could surely have been put to better use.

Not to end on too sour a note, honorable mention is surely due to;

Sue Allison's "Taking a Reading"
Jill Mc Corkle's "Cuss Time"
David James Duncan's soaring "Cherish this Ecstasy"
and Kathryn Miles's wonderful "Dog is our Copilot"

But these amount to no more than 25 pages of 190, or - if you prefer - 4 essays out of 22. a disappointing batting average.


original review starts below:

Definitely an improvement over last year's woeful selection (courtesy of pretentious assmarmot Adam Gopnik), this year's pretty slim collection still doesn't manage to rise above 3 stars. truth be told, it's a solid 2.5 star effort, but I'm willing to round up solely on the basis of Jill McCorkle's delightful "Cuss Time".

What to say? Well, this year's editor is a poet, so that shines through in many of the essays. A lot of writerly writing, if that floats your boat (personally I found many of the pieces more than a little precious). My other criticism, which seems to be a recurring one for this particular collection, is that you, the reader, may not find the navel-gazing of many of the contributors nearly as interesting as they evidently find it.

But if
*the travails of Michael Lewis living in a mansion beyond his means,
*a ten-page account of Garret Lewis's ongoing fight with deer in his backyard,
*10 pages about the personal health and fainting history of someone called James Marcus,
(each of the above delivered in prose that is at best adequate, and with no apparent irony)
is the kind of thing that fascinates you, you may well enjoy this particular selection.

Personally, I am beginning to think that this particular volume in the "Best American" series is about ready to be put on the chopping block.

Back down to two stars - the dross really outweighs the few decent contributions yet again.

Must be the slimmest collection ever. Disappointing selection of essays, with many being less than 10 pages long.

There were about a handful of essays that were either difficult to get through or just didn't interest. Those I particularly enjoyed were "Faustian Economics" by Wendell Berry, Brian Doyle's "The Greatest Nature Essay Ever," "Madre de Dios" by Barry Lopez, Jill McCorkle's "Cuss Time," "Dog Is Our Copilot" by Kathryn Miles, "Return to Hayneville" by Gregory Orr, "Shipwrecked" by Janna Malamud Smith, and "First" by Ryan Van Meter. There were a few others I enjoyed as well, but those were my favorites.

I'm not sure why Mary Oliver, a poet, was chosen to edit an anthology of essays. I guess had this anthology been more enthralling it would have seemed an enlightened choice, but as it is, this is the worst of the BA Essay Anthologies I've read so far. First of all, an overwhelming amount of the essays are about writing (Patricia Hampl's is the best), which is great for us writers, but I'm sure less than captivating for everyone else. Such a selection sure doesn't invite the casual reader into the genre.
Secondly, almost all of the essays are shorter than normal, and on over-done topics, like dogs. I think I'm done reading essays about dogs, even if the dogs are Charles Darwin's. It's like dogs are supposed to be some sort of doppelganger (doggelganger?) of the soul, when in fact, they are dogs, and are thus predictable, and thus add little narrative suspense. I mean, I think dogs are cute in real life, but on the page, there are only so many things a dog is going to do.
And third, even the best writers here seem to be at their worst: I am an ardent fan of Richard Rodriguez, but he should stay out of the Middle East - he doesn't know enough about it to earn his own profound voice. I also love Jerald Walker, but he's writing about writing here, and like so many other writers on writing he comes off as more self-involved than I suspect he actually is.
There are a few essays that outshine everything else: Amy Leach's "You Be The Moon" is one of those essays that will sail 1,000 applications to writing school - truly inspiring. And Michael Lewis's "The Mansion: A Subprime Parable" is a delightful, informative, page-turner - solid nonfiction. Everything else is kinda meh.