I don't see anything wrong with whatever the NY Times Review of Books decides to review or for that matter anything that they choose to write in their reviews. It is up to no one but the NY Times when choosing what books to review.
Some people probably swear by the reviews in the NY Times and "purchase" those books that are reviewed by such an "authoritarian" authority.
Reviews are written by individuals for individuals, there are exceptions of course. What exactly does this mean?? Well for one thing that reviews are going to get much more tailored to your individual profile than they have in the past.
How many reviews does a book really need? It depends upon how many you are willing to read.
Some in this thread have talked of not being being swayed by reviews but I feel they are not paying enough attention to the reviews and the effect that reviews have on the subconscious. There are more things in heaven and earth...
We process all information, but only cogitate upon what our brain considers necessary. What I mean is these words here <-- They are having a far greater effect upon your psyche than you realize. Much more so for a review that is finely crafted.
I trust everyone equally and strive to not base decisions based upon past or present actions, it's all about the future!!! That said I treat all reviews as coming from the same source, the instantaneous infinite universe. Where else would they come from if not from there??
Also, I feel that all books should be subjected to a far stricter quality control before being released onto the various marketplaces. This way we might get around that pesky grammar problem. This quality control will only work if all of us take part in the QA process though. FUN TIMES AHEAD FOR ALL!!
