Reviews

BAD ROMANCE FALLOUT

Over at n+1, Cristina Nehring writes a furious response to Emily Gould’s smiling bitchslap of a review of her book, A Vindication of Love:

Ms. Gould well knows that I’m not the “corduroyed fattish academic” to whom she likens me in the opening of her article…

The Editor’s Response (below Nehring’s letter) references a panel on Feminism that n+1 hosted at the Kitchen last week, the same day the review appeared, saying, “two of the panelists spoke about it at length.”  I was at the panel… it might have been mentioned, but I don’t remember anyone speaking about it at length.

FWIW, Gould’s review is entertaining.  But I haven’t read the book, nor does it occupy a space in my ever-growing to read stack, so I’m not qualified to remark on it substantively.

Tags: ,

21 Comments

  1. Richard

      wow, is it me or is gould a real bitch in this? i thought cristina’s response was spot on – but maybe there is more behind the scenes than i know

  2. Richard

      wow, is it me or is gould a real bitch in this? i thought cristina’s response was spot on – but maybe there is more behind the scenes than i know

  3. Tim Jones-Yelvington

      nehring seems a little more sympathetic to me as well although maybe slightly egoistic with the assumption she should’ve been invited to speak on the panel… but perhaps she needs to do that in order to get deserved credit… it is hard for me to know w.o knowing more about context.

      I found both posts greatly entertaining.

      It seems like she is probably justified to go after gould’s ad hominems… it is one thing to for gould to say she believes nehring’s case is strident and overstated, another to personalize that critique as she does.

      Although nehring certainly comes down to gould’s level and in her response “fights dirty.”

      I think nehring’s books actually sounds provocative… I like the idea of drawing some kind of strength or wisdom from situations and sentiments many would see as deeply compromising or overwrought.

  4. Tim Jones-Yelvington

      nehring seems a little more sympathetic to me as well although maybe slightly egoistic with the assumption she should’ve been invited to speak on the panel… but perhaps she needs to do that in order to get deserved credit… it is hard for me to know w.o knowing more about context.

      I found both posts greatly entertaining.

      It seems like she is probably justified to go after gould’s ad hominems… it is one thing to for gould to say she believes nehring’s case is strident and overstated, another to personalize that critique as she does.

      Although nehring certainly comes down to gould’s level and in her response “fights dirty.”

      I think nehring’s books actually sounds provocative… I like the idea of drawing some kind of strength or wisdom from situations and sentiments many would see as deeply compromising or overwrought.

  5. jereme

      why were you on a feminism panel?

      did you hook up with any of the fattish academic chicks there?

  6. jereme

      why were you on a feminism panel?

      did you hook up with any of the fattish academic chicks there?

  7. Bites: Bolaño’s French Tastes, Panorama Makes a Missed Connestion, Clooney Saving Novels, Tao Lin at Urban Outfitters, and More « Vol. 1 Brooklyn

      […] Cristina Nehring wasn’t too happy with Emily Gould’s review of her book,  A Vindication of Love. (thanks HTMLGiant) […]

  8. Nick Antosca

      I wasn’t on it, I was at it (in the audience). I didn’t hook up with anyone there. None of the women on the panel were fattish academics (I don’t recall if any wore corduroy; I don’t think so). They all had interesting stuff to say, particularly Meghan O’Rourke and Astra Taylor. And Carlene Bauer’s book (a memoir which she read from) sounded good.

  9. Nick Antosca

      I wasn’t on it, I was at it (in the audience). I didn’t hook up with anyone there. None of the women on the panel were fattish academics (I don’t recall if any wore corduroy; I don’t think so). They all had interesting stuff to say, particularly Meghan O’Rourke and Astra Taylor. And Carlene Bauer’s book (a memoir which she read from) sounded good.

  10. Nick Antosca

      I would add that most of the women in attendance were of higher-than-average attractiveness. Most of the men were a little gross-looking and going bald. I myself had not showered that day. Later I realized I was wearing my shirt inside out. So maybe I was projecting?

  11. Nick Antosca

      I would add that most of the women in attendance were of higher-than-average attractiveness. Most of the men were a little gross-looking and going bald. I myself had not showered that day. Later I realized I was wearing my shirt inside out. So maybe I was projecting?

  12. Sean Carman

      I thought Gould’s piece was entertaining and not at all mean. She basically said the book was polemical, dramatic, and tiresome. Meghan O’Rourke’s review in Slate was more thoughtful, and gave Nehring more credit, but still called the book a polemic, and from the excerpts quoted there it frankly does sound dramatic and tiresome. Salon ran an essay that essentially says the same thing Gould is saying, although less in the same snappy, irreverent style.

      Unfortunatley for Nehring, her response did not reach the absurd heights of Ann Rice’s response to her reader reviews on Amazon a year or so back. She also comes up short against Alain de’ Bouton’s over-the-top response to Caleb Crain’s New Yorker review of Bouton’s latest essay collection, in which Bouton later pretended not to understand that his comments on Crain’s blog would be read by the public. Thus Nehring has little to show for her effort. But then the “visceral author reaction to a negative review” is a demanding genre. You can’t just channel your anguished pride and expect that it alone will create a work of art.

  13. Sean Carman

      I thought Gould’s piece was entertaining and not at all mean. She basically said the book was polemical, dramatic, and tiresome. Meghan O’Rourke’s review in Slate was more thoughtful, and gave Nehring more credit, but still called the book a polemic, and from the excerpts quoted there it frankly does sound dramatic and tiresome. Salon ran an essay that essentially says the same thing Gould is saying, although less in the same snappy, irreverent style.

      Unfortunatley for Nehring, her response did not reach the absurd heights of Ann Rice’s response to her reader reviews on Amazon a year or so back. She also comes up short against Alain de’ Bouton’s over-the-top response to Caleb Crain’s New Yorker review of Bouton’s latest essay collection, in which Bouton later pretended not to understand that his comments on Crain’s blog would be read by the public. Thus Nehring has little to show for her effort. But then the “visceral author reaction to a negative review” is a demanding genre. You can’t just channel your anguished pride and expect that it alone will create a work of art.

  14. reynard

      i love how angry the n+1 folks are at everything

  15. reynard

      i love how angry the n+1 folks are at everything

  16. jereme

      nick i was joking around.

      but thanks for the explanation.

  17. jereme

      nick i was joking around.

      but thanks for the explanation.

  18. againandagain

      i’m tired of how angry the n+1 folks are at everything. don’t people outgrow that after highschool?

  19. againandagain

      i’m tired of how angry the n+1 folks are at everything. don’t people outgrow that after highschool?

  20. reynard

      i guess you don’t like punk rock

  21. reynard

      i guess you don’t like punk rock