Sam Sacks on James Wood:
These biases can be exasperating, in part because they make Wood predictable. You sometimes feel you need only read a book’s dust-jacket synopsis to anticipate his glowering judgment or satisfied approbation. More troubling is the frequent tone of moral hectoring. Like all born-agains, Wood cannot really admit the possibility that some readers and writers won’t ever accept his premises, and he seems prone to confronting disagreement with disparagement.
I feel I always know in advance what Wood's judgment will be. If the book in question can be interpreted as an attempt to portray what Wood calls "Mind" (human consciousness), he will approve. If not, he will dismiss it, often in the harshest terms. Within the confines of his established biases, Wood can make sometimes insightful observations, but ultimately those confines are just claustrophobic.
Comments