… Book Reviewing's Grunt Squads - The Chronicle Review - The Chronicle of Higher Education. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)

I realize that … what I’m suggesting here could be easily batted back by reviewers with a simple claim that they were reporting only on their individual reading experience. It’s hard to argue with that. But it’s a peculiar claim to make, too, because what it suggests is that the only way to defend a review that ignores a book’s premise is to acknowledge that you read it self-indulgently.

The individual reading experience needs to be grounded in sound reading comprehension. So failure to grasp the premise of a book is a sound reason for objecting to the review. But life isn't always fair, some reviewers are better than others, and going on at such length about a negative review does seem at least a tad self-indulgent.