Am I the last to hear about Michelle Kerns list of twenty most annoying book review clichés, published in examiner.com in March last year? I think it flickered across my radar briefly a little while ago but it was brought vividly to my attention last week when Ramona Koval (presenter of Radio National’s The Book Show here in Australia) interviewed Michelle Kerns and salon.com reviewer, Laura Miller. I’m not going to report fully on the interview: you can listen to it here if you want to.
Since writing that article, Kerns has created a “game” called “Book Review Bingo“. It contains 24 clichés – with some changes from the original 20 – and they’re listed below (in alphabetical order so you can quickly locate, or not, your favourites):
- at once (as in something is “at once a romance and a mystery”)
- beautifully written
- compelling
- epic
- fully realised
- gritty
- haunting
- in the tradition of
- lyrical
- nuanced
- pitch-perfect
- powerful
- readable
- riveting
- rollicking
- stunning
- sweeping
- that said
- thought-provoking
- timely
- tour de force
- unflinching
- unputdownable
- x meets x (such as “McCarthy meets Hemingway”)
In the interview, the three speakers (Koval fully engaged in this one) discussed (and disagreed to some degree on) favourite (can you call them that?) clichés. One disagreement concerned “that said”. Miller, and I agree with her, suggested it’s not a cliché but more of a connecting word/phrase, a word you use to move from one point or sentence to another. Miller suggested that “however” is used for similar purposes, and that you would never call it a cliché.
That said(!), my questions to you are:
- Do you agree with these clichés?
- What is your view on clichés? Do you actively avoid them? Are there times when you think they can be used?
- Do you have your own pet clichés (that you use, or hate to see used)?
I do try hard to avoid clichés but I know I don’t always succeed – and sometimes there just doesn’t seem to be a better word. What about you?
And, if you are further interested in the subject, you may also like to read Kerns’ report on Robert McCrum’s (of the Guardian) publisherspeak (aka blurbspeak) list. It will make you laugh, if nothing else.
Whispering Gums 
*raises hand* I’m guilty of several. Compelling, thought-provoking, and I think I used rollicking once.
As for ‘that said’, I’ve used it. I admit it. There. *hands crossed* But I’m not convinced it’s cliché.
I’m happy to say I’ve never had the opportunity to use unputdownable.
Thanks for commenting mikidemillion. And I’ve used “riveting”. In fact, after reading this article a few days ago I went and changed a “riveting” to an “engrossing” in a previous post, and felt dirty doing so! LOL! Oh, and I’ve used “That said” a few times too. As for the rest, well others can play the “book review bingo” on this blog and report back…
I had a quick squiz at this when it first came out. I think it’s hilarious. While many bloggers try to avoid cliches, cliches exist for a reason. ‘Poignant’ is my favourite, partly because I love that word but I do try to avoid them when writing up reviews.
I find most of these cliches are used in short reviews in magazines or newspapers. Surprisingly, the reviews I find on blogs are mostly very well written – or perhaps it’s just the blogs I frequent. But really, if it gets people interesting in the book, who really cares how it’s done? Are we being snobbish and demanding that we write a review that doesn’t appeal easily to the masses and that it is barely readable?
And ‘rollicking’? I’ve never seen that one in a review! ‘Tour de force’ annoys the heck out of me.
I used to get in trouble from my PhB supervisor for using “As such”… Dear Graham Cullum, I shall endeavour never to do so again, in honour of your memory.
There are quite a few in this list that I think are quite fine to use… but then again, I’m no fancy-pants literary reviewer 😉
Sometimes the cliche works because it is instantly recognisable and the meaning comes across straight away. Othertimes it is lazy writing from the reviewer. You can usually tell the difference based on how they’ve used it.
Thanks for the excellent post.
Mae: Love everything you say. I’ve used many of the words in the list, including “rollicking” but none of them regularly. As you say, they exist for a reason – and we do want to be accessible (is that another cliche?) to a wide audience. BUT we don’t want to be boring. It’s a fine line isn’t it?
WC: But, you are a fancy-pants chocolate reviewer and I’m sure they have their clichés too. But, I agree that many of the words in the list are fine to use.
Cassandra Jade: Welcome, and thanks for commenting. I love your comment on their being “immediately recognisable” allowing the meaning to be conveyed straightaway. They can work, in fact, as a kind of shorthand can’t they? And, I agree – I have to because I use them myself at times! – that it’s partly the way they are used, and whether they are backed up with something the “proves” or “justifies” the cliché.
I don’t think I use many of those, but I have used a few of them. I think it mainly had to do with the fact that English is my second language though and that I simply don’t think of these words. Personally, I use “though” far too much. I’m going to have to learn a few synonyms: I’m not even sure if it’s an official word.
I’ve been trying to use them all, preferably all in the same post, ever since I read the article…
This sounds like a very fun challenge! 🙂
Oh yes…good challenge indeed!
ps. I am certainly guilty of some of these.
LOL Karen Lee, they are hard to avoid aren’t they, but since reading this my antennae have been working overtime to avoid overusing adjectives. It’s so easy to do so isn’t it … they just pop into the head!
Iris: LOL, but your English is amazingly good. I haven’t noticed too much use of “though” but I’ll be looking out now!
Lisa: You ARE a rebel aren’t you! Perhaps we should all choose your site for Book Review Bingo! But, actually, I think you’ve been failing in your goal as I don’t recollect your reviews being cliche-ridden!
I checked my latest review and found only “powerdul” as in “Her style is understated and powerful”, but I can remember using several of these in other reviews. Most of them are adjectives.
I did call The Children’s Book a ‘tour de force’ with a link to MK’s post, but yes, I’ll have to try harder…
I’ve been trying to use them all, preferably all in the same post, ever since I read the article…
I did.
Here’s what I did come up with when I read the article the first time:
HONEST REVIEW
A timely release, this thought-provoking and beguiling novel, at once a stark and unflinching analysis of the human condition and a darkly comic look into the paranoia of modern life, sees the author at the height of his powers, his stunning imagination and luminous prose finally in service of tightly focused narration and pitch-perfect characterization.
This veritable tour de force, which reads like the unholy offspring of x and y in the tradition of z with a smattering of w, is nevertheless a work of powerful originality sure to impress fans and newcomers alike, and can rightly be lauded as his magisterial effort.
The author J has crafted a compelling, multi-layered epic, a gripping tale brimming with characters which leap off the page, from the gritty though-as-nails sympathetic flawed protagonist M to saucy, spunky down-to-earth romantic objective #3, all swept around inexorably by the powerful and riveting narration, at times sparse and muscular, at times haunting and lyrical, through an unputdownable rollercoaster ride of emotions towards the devastating finale.
J pulls no punches on the reader as he navigates controversial subjects with consummate ease, handling heart-wrenching dilemmas with equipoise, nuance and empathy.
Sparkling dialogue, sudden albeit cliche-free plot-twists, effervescent descriptions all conspire to make this beautifully written, eminently readable novel a towering achievement, but it is its ultimately life-affirming character that declares it an unforgettable triumph.
Marco,
What is the name of the book you are reviewing? I must have that book.
I’ve used readable before, thought-provoking, and on occasion unputdownable. I use that said now and then. I used rollicking once because, well, the book was rollicking. I used haunting once but I was writing about a ghost story called The Haunting of Hill House so I am absolved from sin on that one 🙂 I hate to read reviews and blurbs with the x meets x and the in the tradition of baloney in them. All the rest I generally just ignore because they are overblown and meaningless.
Tony: I’m a bit like what you describe. Most of my reviews may have one of these cliches (but a different one each time!), but I don’t think I overdo them. I’m sure that when I use them I’m being effective!
Lisa: I think I used tour de force some months ago, but I do try to avoid it. And yet, if we can’t use these terms they might as well no longer exist!
Marco: LOL. I love it. And you’ve given us a few more besides that we should now worry about!
Stefanie: I think we think roughly alike – though I haven’t used unputdownable. I have used riveting, because, well, I was riveted! There are several there that I don’t believe I’ve used – but I reserve the right to use them if I feel like it.
Good stuff! Personally I react violently to “pitch-perfect” and “thought-provoking,” and must say that I rather like “unputdownable,” if only because it’s so deliciously awkward!
Personally, I rather like to read X meets X as this can sometimes give me a sense of the sort of book being read. Or by extension something along the lines of “Dickens on crack,” for example. It has a certain ZING. So no objection on that score.
As for “that said” I don’t think that is much a cliche but rather a stylistic issue more than anything else.
Hmmm…why did WordPress want to moderate you? Maybe you came in this time from a different email address? Anyhow, I don’t react overly negatively to the “X meets Y” thing either – but something like “Dickens on crack” is certainly more creative. Maybe that’s the point – find a fresher way of saying it that gives a better sense of exactly what the similarity is?
“This novel about a steelworker is riveting.”
Kevin: LOL, I have used thought-provoking in the past but decided a while ago to try to expunge it from my writing because I do think it is a cliche. You are hereby invited to pick me up any time you see it. Pitch-perfect is something I’d never write – nor, I think, unputdownable, though as you say, it’s a delicious word!
Tony: I won’t even deign THAT one with a reply. LOL.
Gummie: everyone wants to moderate me. What can I say?
I think I’ll let that one (as we say in the Antipodes) go through to the keeper! But, you did make me laugh.
Marco, can I use yours as a template?
I certainly use that said. I don’t particularly plan to stop either.
Otherwise, only readable I think, usually preceded by “surprisingly”. I think that’s sometimes useful because lots of books are good but heavy going. Readability is one of the virtues a book may have.
Besides, if the book’s about something intrinsically offputting (say the Nanking massacre) then the knowledge that it’s highly readable may make a real difference to whether someone attempts it.
All that said, though I don’t think I use them I think there’s good defences to be mounted of haunting, beautifully written, powerful and a few of the others.
Unputdownable I dislike though, usually I find I can put unputdownable books down all too easily. Thought provoking too. What thoughts, precisely, did it provoke?
They missed my particular pet hate though. Important. It’s probably not.
LOL Max, since you used “that said” in your comment as well! I rather like to use it too, as I’ve said. And, I agree with you that there are places for most of those words though it is interesting that different people have different pet hates. I’ve never used “unputdownable” either. BUT I do love your pet hate, Important. I should have thought of that when I wrote my post because it’s one mine too. It’s such a pompous sounding thing to say. That said, I think you’ve made an important contribution to my thought-provoking even if not beautifully written post!!
I definitely avoid unputdownable which is such an ugly word.I don’t think I use too many of the others but I’m sure I have plenty of my own. There must be some software that analyses words used . . . perhaps I’ll avoid it!