Bringing Home the Birkin, to Mr. Tonello

I posted the below comment to Mr. Tonello on the previous post, but figured I should share it here in case it gets lost. (On a semi-unrelated note, the Times ran a list of book summaries for other types of beach reading, available here.)

Sorry for the lack of posting! I've been suffering from internet problems, so I've been saving a few things in draft form to post later. Anyway, just wanted to let you know how thrilled I am that you liked my previous post. I loved your book in so many ways. Aside from it being entertaining, it was so succint, focused, and well-presented that, in my opinion, it seems you've mastered two of the most important aspects of storytelling: knowing where to start and knowing when to stop! It made for a really fun read.

I had skimmed the NYT review prior to buying your book, but I didn't read it that closely until afterwards. (Intentional on my part, since I didn't want what's-her-face's opinion to taint my reading experience.) And, to be honest, it really frustrated me!

The entire review, save for the last paragraph was spent either regurgitating so much of the plot that it was almost a spoiler, or discussing the history of the Birkin bag. Neither should've taken the space it did, and I would've been more interested to hear what was good about the book/what the reviewer liked, rather than a summary.

So in the final paragraph, she barely touches on a substantive review, and all she has to say is that you could have uncovered some deeper truths?? I couldn't believe it. How bizarre and ill-fitting would it have been if this adventure-comedy had turned serious social commentary in the flip of a page? I can hardly think of something more out of the scope of what you're writing about. And, on top of that, I can almost picture the review she would've written if you had included said nuggets of wisdom. ("His social commentary on high-brow consumerism seemed misplaced and poorly constructed and entirely out of place within the scope of the narrative...")

I don't think the reviewer honestly could have thought including a commentary would have made your work better. Rather, I think she was desperate to find something wrong with it, something to disagree with.

Scope is something so subjective that it's difficult to critique. I think once you get past the crucial elements that need to be included in a story, the reviewer needs to respect the discretion of the author. If an author chooses to leave out a non-critical element of the story or choses to define the breadth of the plot in a certain way, can you rightfully criticize them for doing so if all necessary components ARE included? It's a tough line to draw, but in the end, I think not.

As much as she thinks a social commentary should've been included, she should acknowledge the fact that it's not central to the aim of the book, that you chose the scope of your writing as you saw fit, and the book isn't any less great for not including it. My point? I just don't think it was worth mentioning. You define the scope, not her, so why can't she evaluate you based on what you've put forward instead of what you haven't? Sorry I got so carried away - this kind of criticism plagued me during my college years and I clearly still harbor feelings of ill will toward former TFs.

hope all is well with you and you continue writing! (are you going to? more stories?)

Bringing Home the Birkin review available for reading here.