Scott posed a very good question over at Conversational Reading:

I guess my question here is why do the editors of the national bookpages feel compelled to all cover the big books, sometimes weeks and even months after most other pages have already gotten there? Why, if they’re just going to say what’s already been said? Couldn’t they give us a review of a book that we don’t know anything about and that deserves to be appreciated by a wider audience? Wouldn’t that be more valuable?

I have to agree with Scott’s sentiments here. We could do without yet another review of an “important book” by a well known author, and instead substitute a review that alerts us to a book that deserves a wider readership than it is getting. I understand that there is an expectation of commentary on certain books and authors, but these venues would do their readers a great service if they could point more often to some less obvious but deserving choices.