The Salon.com Reader's Guide to Contemporary Authors
Selling itself as a handbook for readers who consume books "for  pleasure,"The Salon.com Reader's Guide to Contemporary Authorshopes to  fill a perceived gap on the reference shelf. Its editor, Laura Miller, declares  in the preface: "We didn't imagine an audience of researchers or scholars or  critics or prize committees or members of the publishing industry, even if some  of those people still do occasionally read a book with the hopes of enjoying  it." The chief irony of this claim is that this Baedeker originated atSalon.com--a den of insiders, merciless critics, and juicy gossip. And  there's plenty here that the "pure" reader wouldn't need to know: the dirt on  big advances, whose career went into a tailspin, what the reviewers said. If  Miller's aim was to escape the careerists of the publishing world, she has  nevertheless assembled a book they'll eat like catnip.And a highly original book it is, too. LikeSalon.comitself, it  collapses the distance between highbrow and lowbrow. Stephen King and Mario Puzo  coexist with Lydia Davis and Donald Antrim; as a result, the game quickly  becomes one of who is not included and who is. To Miller's credit, the answers  continually surprise (though several omissions are regrettable). Loosely  limiting authors to those who have some "contemporary" presence, entries attempt  to place these writers in their time, to argue for their importance and  influence. The entries themselves often suffer from bad writing; here's a  metaphor that should be blocked: "If you could grab hold of one of O'Brien's  images and wrestle it up from the page, you'd find long roots sunk deep into the  earth. There's blood coursing through her exquisite prose, balancing its seeming  delicacy with solidity and weight." Or, my favorite moment of exasperating  silliness: "Are you sure you hate Bret Easton Ellis as much as you hate  yourself?" A more limited pool of reviewers would have diminished a feeling of  unevenness that undermines the book's authoritative posture. The best writing  comes from Miller herself, who has emerged as the Pauline Kael of the book  scene. Her prose is effortlessly provocative.Often an entry about a writer's work will be followed by an essay by that  author. These added essays and digressions are wonderfully varied and  idiosyncratic: David Gates on "Breaking Up with the Beats," Dorothy Allison on  why "Every Novel Is a Lesbian Novel," and though Calvin Trillin isn't assessed,  he is allowed to write about "Books That Made Me Laugh." Combined with the  guide's primary information, these additions allow the reader a glimpse into the  chatter of famous authors--an imaginary tea party free of mercenaries and  showoffs, of course, where pure-hearted readers hold forth about the joy of  books and everybody has a turn.--Ellen Williams