Do you ever find yourself making excuses for a book when you are attempting to recommend it to someone? Stumbling over yourself to point out its shortcomings and failures, assuring your listener that it’s not really a bad book at all (instead of communicating why it’s a good book)?
I’ve been reading Bill James’ new book Popular Crime and I’ve been enjoying it so much I thought I would write up something for the blog about it. I sat down in front of my laptop, and as I tried to organize my thoughts about the book, I found that I was preoccupied with the book’s shortcomings – as if I needed to apologize for liking the book. I imagined myself handing a copy of the book to a customer and mumbling, “You probably won’t like it anyway…”
It struck me that too often I’ve tried to evaluate books on a simple, one-dimensional scale, with one end labeled “Unreadable” and the other end labeled “Life-Changing,” as if there’s only one relevant quality that can be measured and communicated. Books like Popular Crime challenge this notion – they may have obvious and possibly numerous flaws, but those flaws are either canceled out by the strengths, or at least they may be overlooked in order to enjoy the strengths.
Let’s get the weaknesses out of the way. The book is long but not comprehensive. James rambles at length; the digressions border on self-indulgent. The author’s research is essentially anecdotal; no footnotes or endnotes will be found. At one point he notes that he found a piece of information on Wikipedia; later, he recounts a story from an article he admits he can no longer find. This habit would be less noticeable if James didn’t frequently criticize other crime writers for their poor research. James repeatedly reminds the reader of how many crime books he’s read. The structure of the book is uneven; it’s organized chronologically, but the amount of attention paid to each story varies greatly – James may explore the crime for ten or fifteen pages, or he may abandon it after two paragraphs. I could go on, but I won’t.
So why read it? Because all those flaws are momentary distractions. Actually, that’s not even true – I’m not distracted by them while I’m reading – they are just little realizations that come to mind when I’m not reading. But when the book is open, it’s just enjoyment. Yes, it’s a bit rambly, but it’s not tedious, just a pleasantly relaxed discussion on some fantastically interesting crime stories. The digressions may be occasionally self-indulgent, but James always returns to the main story before the readers’ interest wanes. The writing style is direct and unaffected; writers are often described as writing in a “conversational” tone, but too often that simply means that their writing is unpolished. Not here — James’ writing is unadorned, devoid of cliche, and readable.
I will unapologetically recommend Popular Crime. Yes, it has flaws, but they are incidental, not fatal. To allow its flaws to distract from one’s enjoyment would be, well, a crime.
Comments are closed.