Does anyone know when James Wood’s first New Yorker review will run? Those who haven’t read The Broken Estate or The Irresponsible Self lately might welcome Garth Risk Hallberg’s refresher course on Wood’s approach in the form of a thoughtful critique of Wood’s takedown of DeLillo’s ambitious novel Underworld. Hallberg insists that Wood’s just not getting it. I found the book a little starchy, but I expected that going in. None of which is to say that it failed to meet its goals, exactly. I remain agnostic on the subject. How did Underworld go over out there?

Either way, I find it cheering to see such fervent advocacy for an admittedly difficult novel. Hallberg clearly loves the big ambitious fiction of DeLillo, Thomas Pynchon, and David Foster Wallace, references “Jonathans Franzen and Lethem” (endearing him to us, anyway), and treats his adversary (Wood) with due respect: “The essays on Chekhov and Mann in The Broken Estate should be required reading for any novelist.” I really like the flow chart Hallberg provides of “Literary/Critical Conflicts of the Past Two Decades,” with its droll “Darts of Disapproval” and “Rings of Harmony.” How refreshing to see (for instance) n+1, Dale Peck, and Cynthia Ozick diagrammed so saucily and succinctly! —Martin Schneider