Caleb Carr is one author who reads his reviews. Get him mad and he'll even answer them. Get him really mad and he'll write one himself.
Best known for his historical novel, "The Alienist," Carr recently published "The Lessons of Terror," a short analysis written in response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Carr is a contributing editor to Military History Quarterly.
Carr examines conflicts from ancient Rome to the present, and argues that wars waged deliberately against civilians inevitably backfire on the attackers. Among those found guilty of the tactics of terror are Napoleon, Lyndon Johnson, Henry Kissinger and both Palestinians and Israelis.
According to publisher Random House, the book is close to selling out a first printing of 70,000.
"Lessons of Terror" was meant to provoke, and succeeded.
Reviewing the book in The New York Times, Michiko Kakutani wrote that it was filled with "gross generalizations and misguided analogies" and suggested Carr "go back to the writing of fictional thrillers." Entertainment Weekly's Troy Patterson graded "Lessons of Terror" a "D," complaining of "bad grammar, pointless asides (and) tin-eared diction."
Salon.com's Laura Miller praised the book's "enviable firmness of tone and authoritative manner," but found that "when you try to apply Carr's forceful dictums to the situation at hand, they tend to become as slippery and elusive as a handful of live minnows."
While other critics liked "Lessons of Terror" - Stephen Metcalf in The New York Observer credits Carr with "a small, cogent and vitally cool assessment" - the bad reviews apparently were bad enough to make Carr respond.
"Laura Miller follows in the trend of New York literary critics who somehow think they have been suddenly, magically endowed with a thorough knowledge of military history and are, therefore, just as qualified to review books on that subject as they are to chatter about bad women's fiction," Carr writes in a letter posted this week on Salon's Web site.
He accuses Miller of disregarding the facts, saying, "THAT would get you thrown out of the club that meets at Michiko's to watch `Sex in the City' and spout a lot of nonsense about things they don't know."
In an interview Friday with The Associated Press, Miller said, "His response to what's on the whole a fairly gentle review speaks for itself."
Meanwhile, Carr posted a self-review on Amazon.com. Giving himself the highest rating, five stars, Carr says that he is "extremely proud" of his book and implies he may take legal action against his critics.
"Several reviews have made claims concerning my credibility that are, quite simply, libelous, and will be dealt with soon," Carr writes.
"All I will say here is this: the book is the result of a lifetime's study of military history and almost twenty years' study of terrorism. This is my training: my historical fiction was a lucky sideline. So please, give the book a chance and do not listen to 'critics' who complain without any basis or expertise - at least judge for yourselves."
Carr did not immediately return phone calls from The Associated Press. Random House said Friday in a statement: "We have an author who's very passionate about this subject, as well as this book. We support the right for our authors to voice their own opinions."
