Scan barcode
murryloub's review against another edition
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
0.5
TL/DR: Easily one of the worst books I’ve ever read. There’s nothing funny about white male privilege & harassment in academics.
This book is supposed to be funny but I couldn’t find anything to laugh at. This book features an old white male professor who is self-aggrandizing, uncooperative, passive-aggressive, & consistently disrespectful, esp. toward female colleagues & students. He uses LORs to complain about his underfunded dept & harass his ex wife & ex gfs instead of actually recommending the student. He was kicked off the diversity committee for saying that being in arts & humanities should count as diversity.
Clearly I was not the intended audience; I deal with infuriating white men regularly, & there’s nothing funny about the white privilege this book is dripping in. There’s a way to do an unlikeable protagonist but this aint it - I’m not sure the author recognizes that these aren't wacky, humorous mistakes but egotistical, manipulative, harmful actions (& probably some crimes) that should result in this character’s immediate termination.
The gimmick of a book told solely thru letters of recommendation was an interesting concept that enticed me to read this, but not enough to save this trash. While the unexpected heart / pity in the last few letters was nice, it wasn’t enough to redeem the book. This book rivals Furiously Happy by Jenny Lawson as one of the worst “comedic” books I’ve ever read.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Infidelity, Misogyny, Sexism, Toxic relationship, Stalking, and Toxic friendship
Moderate: Body shaming, Bullying, Suicide, and Gaslighting
basicbookstagrammer's review against another edition
emotional
funny
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
Content Warnings
Moderate: Death, Infidelity, Suicidal thoughts, and Suicide
racbuckallew's review against another edition
funny
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
I actually thought this book was really charming. It’s very niche, but if you fit the niche, you’ll absolutely enjoy the read.
Content Warnings
Minor: Death and Infidelity
kstein's review against another edition
funny
lighthearted
relaxing
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Content Warnings
Moderate: Suicide
Minor: Infidelity
jesshindes's review against another edition
funny
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
'Dear Committee Members' is both a campus novel and an epistolary novel, told entirely through the medium of letters of recommendation as written by one beleagured professor over the course of an academic year. I've read a few campus novels (I was pretty into them for a while around the time that I was an undergrad) and I have to say that this one did not stray, nor seek to stray, very far from the conventional bounds of the genre: its hero is a middle-aged, white, male creative writing professor who has both an ex-wife and an ex-mistress on campus, was a bright young thing on the literary scene during his 20s but has struggled to find similar success since, and who is constantly bemoaning the status of his department as compared to that of Economics. This is all fine but I did wonder why Schumacher (presumably not, herself, a middle-aged male creative writing professor) decided to follow this well-trodden path instead of giving us the perspective of (say) an early-career academic or (heaven forfend) a woman. There was definitely successful humour in the book and I laughed out loud a few times, but I feel like she could still have been just as funny (which she evidently has the ability to be) but also said something newer or fresher if she would have taken a different perspective. Again, that's not to say that the book doesn't work on its terms (although there was a plot point near the end which I didn't think was handled well, although again it was handled in a *familiar* way): the epistolary device is appropriate and serves the humour well, and I did feel like she was able to develop the picture of her protagonist, Jason, in a satisfying way over the course of the novel. However, fundamentally I feel like this book - or Schumacher - could have been more ambitious in its approach, and that it would have been both better and funnier for doing so.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Infidelity and Suicide
More...