A Look Back was Re: 'Clue to his vulnerability' (Coming to a conclusion )

[Geoff Bannister]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:

Kneasy:
> Don't get me started on Booker.
> I get very irritated when some self-selected clique arbitrarily 
> decides which other members of the same clique have written books  
> that are worthy of being elevated to the giddy heights of literary 
> prominence.

> Words like 'incestuous' spring to mind. Look up past winners and
> finalists and many are deservedly forgettable. There are exceptions,
> "Figures in a Landscape" by Barry England was shortlisted in the first
> Booker (1969); now that I really rate. But over the past couple of
> decades many works seem to have been picked on a "Buggins turn"
> basis.

Geoff:
Your comments remind me of some comments in Tom Shippey's excellent 
critique of LOTR - "J R R Tolkien: Author of the Century (HarperCollins 
2000).

He has a hilarious section detailing the reactions of the so-called 
literati including folk like Germaine Greer to the success of the books 
in various popularity polls. I think one of my favourites was the 
response of a Sunday Times employee (unnamed) who, hearing that LOTR 
had won the BBC/Waterstones poll, said: "Oh hell! Has it? Oh my God. 
Dear oh dear. Dear oh dear oh dear."

I can visualise similar reactions to the HP books in certain 
quarters.....