I've been writing book reviews for a large Midwestern newspaper for over five years and, in that time, exactly two people have come up to me to say, "Hey, I read that review you had in the Star Tribune last weekend." Certainly, others have seen my reviews, but only after they've been told by me to look for them. It seems, from my vantage point at least, that book reviewing is a big publishing industry echo chamber. It goes like this: The publicist sends out a press release and book to an editor or straight to a reviewer like me. Reviewer reads the book, writes a review, and publicist immediately links to it on author's website. Pull quotes from the review are used on Amazon and Powell's and end up on the back cover of the paperback version. I'm starting to feel like this is a pointless enterprise. I passed by Daniel Alarcon's important debut novel, "Lost City Radio",  now out in paperback. Yes, that's my Star Tribune quote on the cover. (Ask me sometime how I feel about having my silly review quotes on books all over the stores but to not have any of my own tortured fiction published.) You can also find out what I have to say about Daniel Alarcon from Daniel Alarcon's website. So who am I writing reviews for, anyway? If the only person who reads what I have to say about Daniel Alarcon is Daniel Alarcon, why don't I stop trying to find new synonyms for "transcendent" "darkly ironic" and "groundbreaking" and just call the author directly?