Not so long ago the capital’s book journalist community witnessed a funny event. It could be described as a scandal and heated debate at the same time. The newspaper Literatura Plus, published irregularly and having too many problems with design (and print run, of course), carried three devastating reviews in the latest issue, all focused on the newspaper Knyzhnyk Review and the Book of the Year 2000 event.
The issue proved to be in great demand with the book-literary beau monde, and there are many phone calls at the Knyzhnyk’s editorial office. Everybody wants to know when and where to expect the fight.
Another corporate brawl best left alone but for two aspects. First, it is not the first confrontation in the history of domestic book journalism (unlike literary journalism) concealing not only frustration at seeing a new periodical regularly published and reviewing the latest developments on the Ukrainian book market. Why not discuss the quality of Knyzhnyk book reviews or domestic book journalist trends regularly (and I stress regularly) followed by the staff columnists; how the librarian, customer, market researcher, author, etc., benefits from the periodical. Now seems the time to stop rejoicing at the appearance of a really professional publication in Ukraine (with the editors staging large-scale cultural events) and start cooperating with it in a calm and businesslike manner, pointing out mistakes, limitations, shortcomings, and failures. Criticism is necessary, of course, but not in the vein it is kept in all three Literatura publications, since they actually call for doing away with the Knyzhnyk Review, because we supposedly do not need it. We who? Why? What kind of hysterical-anarchic stand is this? Better nothing than this?
The impression is that, concealed behind the pen names and rude texts, are those loath to figure out what is actually happening on Knyzhnyk pages and left with hurt feelings after Book of the Year. Those believing that the awards were conferred on the wrong persons, thus violating the unwritten Who’s Who in Contemporary Ukrainian Literature, Table of Ranks of the capital’s publishing houses, literary VIP hierarchy, and the virtual table of the “untouchable top ten.” Thus books for libraries will be purchased from the wrong distributors, there might even be the wrong names on certificates of distinction and in newspaper articles.
One is strongly tempted to ask whether we cannot do without the usual palm-greasing practice after all these years with so many ratings, events, contests, and such. Does it mean that our society, in this case its literary segment supposed to have developed the notion of genuine and false values, is to be content with a double standard? That instead of debate, discussion, dialogue, healthy criticism we will live by cheap scandals offering convenient topics to dissect over coffee or vodka?
