Are Reviews Necessary?

I don't know: are reviews necessary?
I mean, of books and movies, and so on? I've written some.
Quite a few. I don't the genre. I was almost
always kind, beyond fair. But the
question is more general (who
cares about me?) Many

reviewers seem like little brave,
yapping dogs. They bark
at the stone-mason walking by
as they imagine they're guarding
the huge stone mansion behind
them (Art). They imagine the mansion.

Others are like dogs
that indiscriminately sniff
the boots of anybody
walking by. Everything
excites them. That's not so bad.

A lot of reviews and reviewers
are pleasant to read. Some
reviews save time--you get
the idea of a history book,
or one on science. That's
a service. Otherwise, I'm

just not sure: are
reviews necessary?



hans ostrom 2013

Literary Spat

A noted literary critic writing
a scathing review of a poetry anthology
edited by a noted poet does have
the sheen of a fresh gleaming
hound's turd--this much is true.

Also true is that review, critic,
poet, anthology, and opinions
about opinions will dessicate
as rapidly as the hound's deposit,

turn chalky white,
then go to fine dust,
which is then worked
into soil by water
from a noted rainstorm.


Copyright 2012 Hans Ostrom