Michiko Kakutani and the March of the Obama Books: Defense of A Wild Woman

 Michiko Kakutani is a veteran reviewer for the New York Times, made legendary by her literary criticism—she even earned a Pulitzer Prize for it in 1998, so her opinion is one to be heeded, if you trust the words of critics who sell their souls for shiny medals (pulitzer.org). She has been described as “a weird woman who seems to feel the need to alternately praise and spank” by Salman Rushdie, and a “one-woman kamikaze” who “trashes” books “just to hurt sales and embarrass the author” and assert herself as “an Asiatic [and] a feminist” by Norman Mailer (Marcus, “Rock of Ages” on Amazon.com; “Rolling Stone” 977/978). Granted, Mailer once said “I don't hate women, but I think they should be kept in cages.”

 All of this is pertinent because in the case of a book review by a personality such as Kakutani, any review is sure to be so saturated by her particular force of being that it is wise to know a little about who is being reckoned with. In the January 20th, 2009 edition of the New York Times, she takes on two books at once, both concerning the Obama campaign and upcoming administration; “The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama,” by Gwen Ifill, and “What Obama Means For Our Culture, Our Politics, Our Future,” by Jabari Asim. Kakutani is not impressed. While she gives preference to Ifill's book by addressing it first and giving it more attention and a more balanced review—in contrast to her overall dismissal of Asim's book—she slaps both works with general criticism in the vein of “why did you bother,” pointing out that “their books often feel like value-added amalgamations of arguments made by other journalists during the run-up to the election.” It is a highly effective review because it is highly opinionated about what makes a good book. The subtext is barely below the surface, and it rings loudly. “Don't write books like this. You're doing it wrong.”

 In her voice, the structure of her review, her argument, and all the way down to her individual word selections, Kakutani is without a doubt the archetypal New York Times elitist that lesser minds love to hate, the haughty cultural critic who seems to think that items of popular culture such as rock and roll and People magazine have no fingers to lay on the pulse of the nation's collective consciousness. She seems almost personally offended that Asim would dare to include such tripe in his book, and then be so bold as to treat it as relevant evidence of changing times.

 If she is disconnected from the relevance of popular culture, does that hurt her as a critic? In a word, no. Her incisive reviewing skill is undiminished by the weight of her personality and her personal weaknesses, and this review proves her words can still cut to the bone and make a sound judgment without getting carried away in vitriol. And besides, every renowned critic needs something to get foolishly distracted by.