LETTER: Incompetent reviewer fails to do an excellent novel justice

As a fiction writer with a master’s degree in creative writing, a journalist and an English teacher, I believe I have the credentials to strongly object to one of the worst reviews I have ever read.

From the outset of his review of Vincent Pienaar’s novel Limerence it is clear that John Fraser does not understand this genre at all (“Overstuffed prose makes novel unlikely to create a frisson of limerence”, June 17). I’m not convinced he has read any book in this genre; I even doubt he actually read the entire book.

Take his comment: “...I cannot forgive how the narrative is sabotaged by the author, who darts to and fro between different narrators, chopping and changing between different periods ...” Is Fraser so old-fashioned (or ignorant)? Does he want the story to be written from one character’s perspective and be told chronologically, starting every chapter with “And then ...”?

Any writer expects to get some less favourable reviews, but can only accept it if written by a reviewer with the necessary credentials. From such reviews one can even learn. But a badly written review such as this only causes damage, not only to the writer’s sales figures but the book industry as a whole.

Fraser’s condescending, patronising tone and use of phrases such as: “overstuffed prose”, “lightweight tale”, “inflated language”, and “desperate attempt to be witty”, among  many others, make it clear that he was not qualified to evaluate this novel. The unnecessary repetition of certain phrases and elements, while ignoring many other important aspects, is an example of the reviewer’s incompetence. 

I have tried to determine whether Mr Fraser has any literary credentials. I could find none. This raises the question: how can a “business journalist” without any appropriate credentials have been tasked to write a review of a book when he clearly did not grasp the writer’s intention, unique style, great plot, excellent characterisation, humour and settings. (Fraser at least recognised Melville.) 

The reviewer creates the impression that the article is about him; the hero who can assist in turning the text into a television series. If it is such a badly written book, why would he be interested in turning it into a film or television? Should such comments even be included in a review?

In contrast to this piece, a review in Vrye Weekblad written by Debora Steinmar, well-known (and, for the record, highly respected) writer, English lecturer and critic, loved the book and praised it highly, recommending that readers should get it.

Pienaar does not “try to be humorous” as Fraser suggests. His books are a perfect mixture of tragedy and comedy. He is a master of this genre. (His previous novel Too Many Tsunamis was nominated for the Sunday Times Barry Ronge fiction prize. His debut Afrikaans novel Joburg, Die Blues en 'n Swart Ford Thunderbird) was nominated for the Rapport prize for best debut novel.)

What a sad thought that SA writers may be slaughtered by incompetent, arrogant, aggressive and uninformed reviewers. 

Anel Heydenrych
Colesberg

JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an e-mail with your comments. Letters of more than 300 words will be edited for length. Send your letter by e-mail to letters@businesslive.co.za. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.