HomeReviewsInterviewsStoreABlogsOn Writing


Harriet Klausner

Are they on crack?

Oh I get it, she’s a representative of the online reading community.

I ask again, are they on crack?

The woman loves every single freaking book that she reads. How is that a good thing? Does anybody actually care about her opinion on books, or like me, do you read them just for the blurbs when she gets the storyline right, anyhow.

I got this article via the SB’s.

I think the piece is basically saying that professional reviewers suck arse, and that us amateurs are the bees knees.

That’s just my take on it, obviously. (g)

Incidentally, not being mean or anything, but am I the only person who thinks Klausner looks way older than 54?

Just sayin’.

12 Comments »


  • Dee
    December 22
    4:48 pm

    If she’s 54, Methuselah is a lad.

    ReplyReply


  • Barbara B.
    December 22
    4:54 pm

    Fifty-four my ass. I’m gonna have to call bullshit on this one.

    ReplyReply


  • sancre
    December 22
    5:01 pm

    Okayyyy, I thought someone said that Harriet was paid for promotion of books? Did I dream this or was that just someone spouting off.

    I have read many of her “reviews” and I don’t think of them as reviews. I think of them as synopsis with basically no more than “I recommend this book”. I say this because she only reviews books that “she” likes. That doesn’t really tell me diddly squat. She has said that herself. So I guess the publishers are sending her books in hopes that she will recognize it.

    Does she get some incentive from amazon for posting her “reviews”?

    However, I take umbruge at the age issue… lol. I am almost fully gray and I am only 46.. what I found quite disturbing is that the photo is of her in her home… do you see the stacks and stacks of books in that room… I now picture this woman living in a house overrunn by books…

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    December 22
    6:09 pm

    Frankly, when I heard about Time’s Person of the Year, I found it gimmicky and, well, lazy. Like something you’d hand in for a year 8 assignment when you couldn’t be bothered to do any research. And picking Klausner to represent reader reviewers is just proof of the same. There’s no way I’d consider her write-ups as reviews, and it’s a poor day for journalism when Time magazine can call her a “critic”. IMO, Klausner is to reviewing what vanity press is to publishing.

    And Karen, you are the bees knees. 🙂 Have a lovely Christmas!

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    December 22
    6:27 pm

    publishers wishful thinking….

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    December 22
    9:51 pm

    All I know is that Klausner gave a glowing, syrupy review to one of the worst edited and convoluted books I ever read (I’ll be kind and not give the title). So if indeed the woman has clout, I can’t see where it is being used wisely.
    Gloria, a reader from US

    ReplyReply


  • Dee
    December 23
    2:44 am

    No umbrage needed. It’s not about her being gray that makes her look ancient (my family has a history of premature gray and turn into skunks at age 30 before going totally gray and dyeing it like mad) . It’s the frightening resemblence to Anak Sun Amun’s walking corpse in the skin department, lol.

    ReplyReply


  • Avid Reader
    December 23
    3:37 am

    You know, looking at that pic, I would have guessed early 80’s. Tops.

    I frown when I see her review as the ONLY review available and inside myself, I’m pleading for another review by…anybody…anybody ELSE.

    Keishon

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    December 23
    3:39 pm

    Every Klausner review reads like nothing but regurgitated press copy from the publisher. There’s no critical literary analysis of the merits or deficiencies of a given work, just cheerleader rah, rah rants from Klausner extolling the virtues of her favorite authors and their latest masterpieces. If Klausner represents the state of fiction reviewing today, then I say fiction reviewing is a dead and lost art. Caveat emptor!

    ReplyReply


  • Scott
    December 24
    4:51 pm

    Harriet Klausner influential!?!?

    I swear, there is so much shit out in the world. First, her suck-ass reviews. Now someone saying she is influential. THE MEDIA SUCKS!!

    I NEVER read her reviews anymore. The woman can NOT read that many books in a year, and as mentioned loves everything. She is the biggest bag of BULL SHIT I have ever come across. She needs to be burned at the stake. I have a habit when at Amazon to click the “This Review Not Helpful” button anytime I see her review.

    Nothing like having your holiday ruined then having Time Mag name this load of crap influential.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    January 1
    1:38 pm

    I have serious a serious concern about Harriet Klausner’s credentials. She reviews far too many books to have possibly read them all. She claims to be a speed reader,which is patently ridiculous when it comes to actually reading and comprehending.

    All her reviews, if you will look at a few, consist of the back cover blurb and then an added sentence at the end.

    She has read and reviewed 12,989 books for Amazon!? I think not! Twenty-two on December 31 alone? Puh-lease! It is simply impossible. Also, I have never seen a review of less than 4 stars. ALL her reviews are outstanding. Hard to believe.

    Frankly, I am surprised at this obvious deception.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    July 31
    2:20 am

    I don’t think she reads most of what she purportedly writes about. We were discussion on Amazon how she gets things wrong, like the gender of main characters, when their names are things like “Jan” — that is, she reads the blurb and presumes it’s a female, when of course Jan is a male name as well.

    I don’t think she’s at all influential. No one seems to hang on her reviews.

    ReplyReply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment