Evgenia Peretz's article in Vanity Fair, It's Tartt -- But Is It Art ? -- using Donna Tartt's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel as a case-study, as: "the polarized responses to The Goldfinch lead to the long-debated questions: What makes a work literature, and who gets to decide ?" -- has been much discussed and commented upon already (now even rating a mention at Time, for example).
I mention it because -- well, you can find a lot of links to a lot of those reviews at the complete review review-page; it's enjoyably absurd; and it gets lots of great/absurd quotes, from Jonathan Galassi helpfully weighing in (no bother that he: "hasn't yet read The Goldfinch" ...) to Lev Grossman suggesting:
I mention it because -- well, you can find a lot of links to a lot of those reviews at the complete review review-page; it's enjoyably absurd; and it gets lots of great/absurd quotes, from Jonathan Galassi helpfully weighing in (no bother that he: "hasn't yet read The Goldfinch" ...) to Lev Grossman suggesting:
A critic like [James] Wood -- whom I admire probably as much or more than any other book reviewer working -- doesn't have the critical language you need to praise a book like The Goldfinch. The kinds of things that the book does particularly well don't lend themselves to literary analysis ....Oh, yes, good fun to be had, all around.