Ouch! Eileen Battersby got served.

John The Bad

Here is Eugene McCabe's letter to today's Irish times in response to Battersby's review of Dermot Healy's Long Time No See.

Madam, – I have just read Eileen Battersby’s Olympian review of Dermot Healy’s Long Time No See. She presses all the right buttons to show the editor and the reading public how knowledgeable she is to expound on his work. Very professional, well indexed stuff. I have also read it. Clearly we were reading different novels. What does it mean when the subtitle states, “Dermot Healy has written a young man’s novel but its dialogue and observations are far longer than this story justifies”? I hesitate to use the word stupid but that’s how that subtitle strikes me.

Does Ms Battersby look at the photograph of Dermot Healy and say: This is an old man’s effort not fashionable like Neil Jordan’s so I’ll disembowel him because that’s how I feel today?

We were all privileged to read Ms Battersby’s ghost story in The Irish Times Magazine a few months ago. It was a revelation. Sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, it was the worst piece of creative writing I have ever read in a long life of reading. Truly. Stunningly bad. I have used it in a workshop as an example of how to avoid writing “sh ite and onions”. That this person has the temerity to sit in negative judgment on one of the great masters of Irish writing should not pass without comment. – Yours, etc,

EUGENE McCABE,

Drumard, Clones,

Co Monaghan.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2011/0329/1224293298089.html

Ouch or what. "Sh ite and onions"!

Here's the link to her review:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2011/0326/1224293117787.html

Has anyone read/is anyone reading Long Time No See? What's the consensus?

PS Isn't it truly ridiculous that the Irish Times can print the word "SHlTE" but boards.ie won't?

Eliot Rosewater

I'm delighted. I've only read one piece of Eileen Battersby, which was her uninformed attack on JD Salinger after his death. (She had only read one of his four books, and was basing much of her opinion on popular responses to Catcher in the Rye.) I don't mind having different opinion to people, but if they are unwilling to inform themselves and make an honest judgement they lose all of my respect.

(I'm aware of the terrific irony in the paragraph. )

John The Bad wrote: »

PS Isn't it truly ridiculous that the Irish Times can print the word "SHlTE" but boards.ie won't?

Shite's sake John - you're just not hitting the keys hard enough!

rubabbel

Missed this. It's brilliant when people take her up on her reviews, which are hilariously bad at times. My particular favourite was her review of Falling Man, which began:
They came on a clear, bright morning, the aeroplanes – the aircraft that crashed into the towers, changing America, changing everything, forever.

I'm always bemused at Christmas time when people queue up to purchase the books she's reviewed.

nompere

John Banville has come to her defence in today's paper.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the discussion, the quality of the letters in madam's organ looks set to improve!

Wester

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Eileen Battersby's review, Eugene McCabe should not have become involved. John Banville suggested as much today with his letter. It wasn't even McCabe's book, although I understand he is a friend of Dermot Healy's. With reviews, you just take the good with the bad.

Jane Eyre

It takes a brave writer to criticise EB. She is incredibly powerful in the Irish literary scene like it or not, and if she gives you a bad review, your book sales will suffer. I agree with her reviews some of the time. She was right about Skippy Dies. Remarkable that it didn't make the Booker shortlist, especially when such a crap book as Finkler Question won, but Neil Jordan's 'Mistaken' is, imho, a bad book full of, well, mistakes. Hard to believe she actually read it judging by her review which described it as the great Irish novel we've all been waiting for. I don't think so.

hatful

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2011/0330/1224293354496.html

John Banville has weighed in now. I'm not a fan of Eileen Battersby I flicked through her book of reviews 'Second Readings' and didn't find it very inspiring however Banville has a point, critique the work not the artist.

Lest we forget Banville is the master of literary trolling. In 2005 Ian McEwan's Saturday got rave reviews from the critics and looked set to win the Man-Booker prize for 2005. Then came a devastating review by Banville in the New York Review of Books - 'Saturday is a dismayingly bad book. The numerous set pieces- brain operations, squash game, the encounters with Baxter, etc. - are hinged together with the subtlety of a child's Erector Set. The charachters too, for all the nuzzling and cuddling and punching and manhandling in which they are made to indulge, drift in their separate spheres, together but never touching, like the dim stars of a lost galaxy'. (I have to agree it was tripe).

The head of the man booker prize committee wrote something to the effect that Banvilles estimate was incorrect.... however.....

That year John Banville's 'The Sea' won the Man Booker Prize

Denerick

Mc Cabe is my hero! I've actually met him a couple of times, he lives up the road from me; a real character of a man.

Someone who clearly doesn't take any shíte from mediocre hacks like Battersby!

nompere

Two more pro-Battersby letters in the IT today.

I suppose it's possible that madam is suppressing anti-Battersby letters ...

totothejuggler

Eugene McCabe or papa as I call him is actually my grandfather, and while I am by no means defending his letter to the times, as we all think it was rather foolish, you have to agree that the short story Battersby wrote was not the best in the world .

P.S papa recently had a knee operation and I don't think he has much to do these days, that may also account for his crankiness. Anyway, don't be to rough with him he is recovering HAHA

hatful

Don't worry toto he's certainty no Jacqueline Howett

http://booksandpals.blogspot.com/2011/03/greek-seaman-jacqueline-howett.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2011/mar/30/jacqueline-howett-bad-review

Rabble Rabble

hatful wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2011/0330/1224293354496.html

John Banville has weighed in now. I'm not a fan of Eileen Battersby I flicked through her book of reviews 'Second Readings' and didn't find it very inspiring however Banville has a point, critique the work not the artist.

Lest we forget Banville is the master of literary trolling. In 2005 Ian McEwan's Saturday got rave reviews from the critics and looked set to win the Man-Booker prize for 2005. Then came a devastating review by Banville in the New York Review of Books - 'Saturday is a dismayingly bad book. The numerous set pieces- brain operations, squash game, the encounters with Baxter, etc. - are hinged together with the subtlety of a child's Erector Set. The charachters too, for all the nuzzling and cuddling and punching and manhandling in which they are made to indulge, drift in their separate spheres, together but never touching, like the dim stars of a lost galaxy'. (I have to agree it was tripe).

The head of the man booker prize committee wrote something to the effect that Banvilles estimate was incorrect.... however.....

That year John Banville's 'The Sea' won the Man Booker Prize

But Banville is right about Saturday, it is dire. The Sea is pretty good, as was Never Let me go.

buck65

I actually think Battersby is a decent reviewer and always have a look at her reviews. She does tend to go overboard if she likes a book but her analysis is often ineresting.
Also the scope of her choices is often refreshingly off the beaten path.

John The Bad

Ah, I just figured out how Eliot typed "shite". That's the most important point from this thread for me.

I think McCabe was too aggressive in his letter but I know where he was coming from. I haven't yet read Long Time No See so I can't say whether or not I agree with Battersby's review. But I will say that reviews in general are given too much weight and importance. The wrong words from someone like Battersby could sink a novel and that's a writer's livelihood we're talking about. Of course we should have reviews and it's important to critique art but the book is more important than the review, always so.

I too read Battersby's short-story and it was terrible. She's no writer. So I can well understand McCabe's anger and frustration that her word might be given more credence than someone who can write.

Denerick

I call it the 'Eamon Dunphy affect'. Dunphy was a rubbish footballer but delights in destroying the reputation of rubbish and mediocre footballers, and does it with gusto. He is and 'opinion former', and certain players (For years Nani was known as 'Ronaldo-lite' because of him) have their reputation ruined on the basis of his prognostications. Luckily for Nani he prospered with the disappearance of Ronaldo but for every Nani there are a 1000 Keith Gillespe's!

John The Bad

Good man Denerick; we went from talking about Healy, McCabe and Battersby to "for every Nani there are a 1000 Keith Gillespe's!" I'm off now to try and smuggle some thoughts about Irish writers into the thread about Dublin's collapse in yesterday's League Final.

Check it out -- http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056248641&page=6

Denerick

The Dubs in a way are like Pat McCabe -- he quietly worked away and produced good novels like Clinton Street and Carn, each one improving on the last until he then blew the world away with The Butcher Boy.

Just spreading the love...