Guess I'm one of them ...

... Meet the keystone kops of criticism.

I actually think there's less here than meets the eye. Recently, I decided against asking someone to review a book precisely because there might be issues between the that person and one of the authors. The name of the game is book reviewing, not settling scores. True, scruples in this regard can be taken to an extreme. I'm sure John Irving's book provided plenty of good reasons on its own for Marianne Wiggins to trash it. Bur having friends - or enemies - reviewing books is not the surest way of providing the reader of the review what that reader is likely looking for: some indication as to whether the book is worth time and money. Much of life can proceed smoothly if we remember to ask the first question one poses when diagramming a sentence: What or whom am I talking about? The answer in this case is a reasonably impartial review.