We're Not Necessarily Through With the Times Yet

Over at The Reading Experience, Dan Green shares his thoughts about the NYT assault on fancy writing, and it turns into quite the lively debate. One commenter gets in a remark that pretty much absolves me from having to write my own reaction to a recent article, though I disagree with the extent of his vehemence against a book I have not yet read but will admit some curiosity about:

The only thing I wanted to mention was the irony, in light of all that, of seeing Chip McGrath's piece today concerning Winegardner's Godfather book, a piece which--while conceding that the original and its sequels were potboilers--in effect provides this intrinsically shabby book with a second lengthy daily NYT review, complementing the mild-mannered takedown last week. Now, how are all these damnably obscure NBA-nominated writers supposed to get any ink at all if the Times volunteers to perform above and beyond the call of duty by devoting valuable column inches not once (which is one time too many) but twice to this kind of crap?