A few weeks ago, readers requested that we invite a book critic to one of our regular publishing insider webchats. We are delighted to say that Alex Clark has been brave enough to sit in the virtual hot-seat, this week and answer your questions.

Alex is a reviewer and writer for the Guardian and Observer. She's a regular on the books site, most recently writing about American debut novelist, Erin Morgenstern. She's the former deputy literary editor of the Observer, has worked for the Daily Telegraph's books section, and was Granta magazine's first female editor.

Alex will be here to answer your questions from 1pm to 2pm this Friday, 28 October. Feel free to start posting questions now, and come back on Friday to read her replies and join the conversation.

You asked, Alex replied

UnpublishedWriter asked:

How do you choose which books to review?

Alex Clark replied:

How I come to review the books I do is a bit of a mixture. I keep an eye out on things that are coming up and stick my hand in the air when there's something I'm particularly interested in. For the Guardian, I tend to look at lists of all the books coming out over a six-month period and come up with a "wishlist" of what I'd most like to do. But it's really up to the editor of the pages - and actually, I really like being asked to do something unexpected, perhaps by a writer I've never read before.

cyncurran and devorshebrown asked:

Do you ever find yourself swept up in the praise for a novelist even though you may have reservations?

How honest can you be? Do you get a choice of what you review, even if you know it wasn't your cup of tea?

Alex replied:

You've both got to the heart of the matter pretty quickly. Trying not to get swept up in all the noise around a book - whether positive or negative - is one of the hardest things about being a critic, and also one of the most important. I think I'd be lying if I said I'd never been influenced by a writer's reputation, or what I expected the book to be like before I'd read it, but it's important to try your hardest. Ditto worrying about what people will think you've said.

The key thing is to try and respond to what's actually on the page in front of you - how it works, what the author's tried to do, whether they've succeeded, how it works on your brain. That's the aim, anyway...

octopusluke asked:

I know it's part of the job, but how do you manage to get through books so quickly to meet a review deadline? Moreover, with particularly affecting books, is it hard to drop one and go to the next?

Any tips on speed reading would be greatly appreciated too!

Alex replied:

Well, insomnia helps! (I'm serious.) I guess I do read pretty much all the time, and in every spare moment. It helps not to have a smartphone (I've noticed that that's what people do in those odd moments of life now.) But, yes, sometimes moving between books is quite challenging. I also take alot of notes while I'm reading, so I don't always have to come back to something completely fresh.

gorky1 asked:

Should a (literary?) critic offer something original to the review? I'm thinking of Barthes; Williams; Foucault; Sontag etc;

Alex replied:

I wish I were in such exalted company - these are some serious thinkers and brilliant writers you're talking about. But that's the ambition - you want to provoke thought with what you write, not simply recount the plot and restate the author's position.

frustratedartist asked:

Do you read for pleasure, as well as for work? If so- do you find that your critical training adds to or reduces your pleasure in reading?

Alex replied:

The line gets a bit blurred sometimes - which is not to say that work's always a pleasure. But I'm lucky enough to be writing, often, about books that I'd be reading anyway.

I'm not sure I'd describe myself as having critical training exactly, but I know what you mean - sometimes I remember that frenzied period of teenage reading, when I was discovering so much for the first time but didn't have to do anything with it. Maybe retirement will be the same...

Henrytube asked:

How thick-skinned do you have to be? Is it the case that you really have to be unafraid of making enemies to do the job justice? Do you ever reach a point with a book and say, I really can't review this without burying the author? Can you just review books you like, or would you consider that a bit pointless?

Alex replied:

Yes, I think you do have to be unafraid - but I think that's different from so-called hatchet jobs, or venomous reviews that are there to (supposedly) entertain the reader, but don't actually advance the argument at all. Sometimes I like books and sometimes I don't - but I guess the worse thing is when you've really wanted to like a book - if it's by a writer you've admired in the past, or about something you're really interested in - and it doesn't live up to your expectations. Again, you've got to separate what you wanted to read and what's actually there - but I think you've got to be prepared to say what you think in as honest a way as possible.

Henrytube and JohnSelf asked:

I remember a few years ago a critic refused to review a book, telling the Guardian he'd settle for a "modest kill fee" then he sold the review to a rival paper. Is this an indicator as to how flexible the job can be? I forget the names but presumably he was a freelancer making up his own rules and didn't mind upsetting the author or the newspaper... I'd be interested to know how that little rumpus wound up. Maybe Robert would tell us?

Alex replied:

@Henrytube @JohnSelf - think I should tactfully stay out of the Sam Bourne/Jonathan Freedland/Michael Dibdin debate!

rebeccacosgriff asked:

Can you give any tips for aspiring book critics like myself (I also recently reviewed Erin Morgenstern on my blog!)?

Alex replied:

Well, keep blogging and joining in comments forums. I think the outlets for writing about books have increased hugely since I first started reviewing. Indulge me in a brief biographical note - the first book I ever reviewed was called Stella Landry, by Robin McCorquodale. 600 words for the Times Literary Supplement in 1992. I was so nervous that I stayed up all night rewriting and rewriting it. Then I faxed it - yes, really - in the morning. Then I was so anxious that the fax hadn't arrived that I hand delivered a copy to the TLS. Then I bought 6 copies of the paper when it came out.

That all happened because of the wonderful Lindsay Duguid, the TLS's fiction editor until recently. She really believed in giving people who'd never before been published a chance - and my working life would have been completely different without that first break. So my real advice is to find your Lindsay Duguid.

JonnyGibbings asked:

Hi, I'd like to know do you accept bribes? I could do with some good reviews when mine is out in March. Not got much cash, so could mow your lawn and punch your boss in the back of the head?

Just a thought.

Alex replied:

Ha! I wish! I'll think of something I'd really like and let you know. Please do send me your book c/o the Guardian if you'd like.

bettyparry asked:

I recently read Henry James THE TURN OF THE SCREW. I found it tortuously mindnumbingly boring. I'd always heard that was a great writer. Is this book his odd one out, or is he as brilliant as critics say and I'm just thick?
I assume you'll say "neither but ........

Alex replied:

Repeat after me: you are not thick. It is perfectly OK not to like certain books, or certain writers. I would say persevere with James because he's pays dividends, but it may be that he's just not for you.

And on that note - something I really believe in. Give a book a fair chance, but if you don't like it, don't feel you have to read it until the end. We have finite lives, and we'll never read all the books we want to, so don't waste precious reading time on something that you're not going to enjoy.

5onthe5 asked:

Every book I pick up seems to be emblazoned with critical notices and quotations, heavily featuring the phrases "masterpiece", "...of the year", "stunning", "heartbreaking", "...of her generation".

How do you think the situation has arisen wherein so many books are lauded so highly, and have you ever seen a quote from one of your reviews spun slightly out of context?

Alex replied:

I hate the over-selling of books - it drives me mad because I think it does the publishing industry no good at all. And yes, I have been quoted out of context - it's happened very rarely, but it's annoying when it does.

aronowitz asked:

The Guardian reviewer Alfred Hickling gave my second novel, IT'S JUST THE BEATING OF MY HEART, a somewhat mean-spirited and snide assessment in his 'capsule review' of May 2010 (I notice that the Guardian's website had the kindness not to make this review available online).

Given the cursory glance that he gave the book in the review, how can I be sure that he actually read it?

Alex replied:

I just wanted to say that I've never met Alfred Hickling but I really doubt that he didn't read your book thoroughly - that's the first duty of the critic. But it is quite difficult to get a nuanced argument across in a very short review - sorry it wasn't what you'd hoped for.

@R042 asked:

My question, based on a very stern piece of advice I was once given, is this - Should a literary critic read non-literary fiction for entertainment and do they have time to do so between all the books they have to read?

I was told in no uncertain terms that any true critic should not stoop to do so.

Alex replied:

Who told you that?! Nonsense. I read non-fiction all the time, though not nearly as much as I'd like to...

patremoir asked:

With thousands of books published every year, and fewer and fewer reviewers to review them, what does a writer have to do to get their book noticed by a reviewer? J. L. Carr famously got a review, and eventually an introduction, out of Michael Holroyd by pretending to be a butcher and sending Michael a blood soaked card, along with a supposed award copy. Unfortunately we can't all be that creative and the postage is expensive. For me to send a book from Canada costs approximately twenty British pounds, and so far I've spent two hundred pounds without one review to show for the money. Meanwhile, in the Vancouver area where I live, my book Fathers: A Literary Anthology (www.patremoirpress.com) has obtained excellent reviews and publicity. What do I have to do to catch the eye of a British reviewer?

Alex replied:

I so wouldn't review a book if someone sent me a blood-soaked card! But, listen, it's very difficult to get books into the right hands, and near impossible for editors to be able to feature more than a small fraction in their pages.

Do feel free to send me your book at the Guardian, but you may not want to spend another £20. Do you have an electronic version?

LilyHerne asked:

Have you ever received a response (aggrieved or courteous) from an author whose novel you have reviewed unfavourably, and if so, how did you deal with this?

Alex replied:

I'm not sure I have, which seems unlikely, doesn't it? Quite possibly my editors shield me from them. But I think I'd happily respond - I like debate. And I don't even mind a scrap, once in a while.

Alex

Well, I think I'm about to run out of time, and I feel I've got loads more of you to talk to. Perhaps they'll allow me back at some point. Just as a very broad sweep of some of the rest of the questions, though - I do think critics are useful (I tremble to say important), because I think that a literary culture is one of the most wonderful things you can have. And for it to flourish, you need debate and discussion and interest. I like the fact that the debate's opened up over the last few years and I think everybody should chip in. For my part, I hope that the critic can offer some expertise and knowledge to the conversation.

And, on that note, bye for now.