This was one of my most anticipated books for 2025, and it was a bit of a let down. Sadly. The book consists of two new essays from the Pulitzer winning critic, and the rest are previous published essays of criticism. Let me start with the good, Chu is so incredibly talented at the take down. These are what made her famous and these are what she does best. Every single essay in this book that skewered an artist or piece of work was a delight to read. She finds so many ways into her hatred, it is admirable. Here is the catch, she doesn’t seem to like anything. Which is fine, but also I wanted at least one rave to see how she would/could write something like that. I kept being like, so what is the art you do like? There are also some really amazing pieces on gender and feminism and her experiences as a trans woman. But then we get to the other pieces in the collection, they lacked clarity and strong arguments, which meant I was bored with them especially when I didn’t know the material. The two new essays are just okay, especially the title essay. Ultimately, she is a great writer, but the collection is spotty.

A thoughtful look at criticism and its changing role in literature. Chu's excellent writing and detailed analysis provided a refreshing challenge for this retired AP Literature teacher and librarian. A delight to read.

Over on my booktube channel (Hannah's Books), I shared this book in my description of exciting books forthcoming in April. Link to the particular discussion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iLFZz7j1bs&t=345s

Thank you to FSG and Netgalley for providing me with a digital ARC of this book.

Andrea Long Chu’s Authority is a collection of sharply incisive pop culture critiques – ranging from the works of Hanya Yanagihara to Andrew Llyod Webber’s The Phantom of the Opera – interspersed with more personal essays that continue to pull at the threads of broader social topics. If you’ve grown weary of the dearth of uninspired, unresearched cultural critique flooding your YouTube recommendations or you’ve never had the pleasure of reading one of Chu’s book reviews, I implore you to consider picking this book up. Or at least reading ‘Hanya’s Boys.’

Perhaps I’m biased. I will confess that I do love a scathing book review. I had already read some of Chu’s work and found I enjoyed the way she engaged with the source material and used it to infer about the perspectives and beliefs of the author. There’s a level of commitment and attention to detail that – regardless of whether you find the work of critics exhausting – you have to commend in a world where everyone, by the nature of social media, is a critic. The tentpole essays of this book – “Criticism in a Crisis” and “Authority” – are enduringly long but brimming with real insight.

I love Andrea Long Chu's writing and have eagerly awaited her first full collection. Even when I disagree with her I find her to be one of our most incisive thinkers who always pushes the boundaries of public thought. Finally, a critic for our times.

I admit to being a bit disappointed that Authority didn't contain more original work, but having Andrea Long Chu's best and most divisive works of criticism collected in one volume is still a treat for readers. The most joyful part of reading Chu is when you find yourself furiously agreeing with her epic take-downs, and I certainly had a number of those experiences while exploring this collection. At the same time, the new pieces that offered meta commentary about criticism felt somewhat disconnected from the criticism itself. All in all, a good book to have in your collection if you enjoy contemporary cultural criticism, but nothing life changing or particularly fresh.

This book is a sharp exploration of the role of criticism and why it still matters today. It includes Andrea Long Chu’s collection of essays, mostly published previously, and they're, let's say, unapologetically honest and mean, and I loved them. In many ways, that feels like what literary criticism should be. Bold and opinionated.

The essays within look at many authors and their respective works, from Hanya Yanagihara, Bret Easton Ellis, Celeste Ng, Zadie Smith and so on, and I'm still thinking about that chapter on Yanagihara and 'A Little Life' ("...an unpologetic lifestyle novel"). Really? I devoured it anyway. There are two new essays included in this book, including a titular one at the end, which explains her thinking of what people look to in true criticism - something she emphasises again in her epilogue.

“…Let thought starve. The only criticism worth doing, for my money, is not the kind that claims to improve society in general; it is, as the late John Berger once wrote, the kind that helps to destroy this particular one. To be clear, I do not wish to overvalue the business. I have no illusions about the political power of a staff writer at a print magazine owned by a corporation: I do not think it is much, though I am not foolish enough to suppose it is nothing. But I do believe that criticism, at its best, can be a small act of freedom. Not, I should say, “freedom of thought” as the liberal understands it—that is, the freedom to entertain every idea and commit to none. This is not true freedom; it is merely license, and always depends on the approval of some authority…

This is why we cling to authority: it guarantees our freedom while relieving us of the burden of exercising it, turning it into something fine and handsome and altogether useless, like an old suit of armour.”

I consider myself quite well-read, but the contents of these essays really make me want to read more and understand better. So good.

This is a difficult collection to review, because while Andrea Long Chu’s writing is lovely and thought-provoking, a lot of the content here isn’t wonderful.

This is a selection of Chu’s published work, and it’s difficult to get past the fact that every piece here has a largely negative bent to it. Critics are, by definition, critical. But to either find fault with everything you discuss or to choose only to include fault-finding pieces in a collection has a lot of—to put it in a way I’m sure Chu would take issue with—real hater energy.

I think Chu makes some salient points at times, even when she’s after something many of us like. But when the attack starts to feel like the point, that’s no longer good criticism. The mean-spiritedness of the section on Curtis Sittenfeld as well as the exacting semantic attacks on Zadie Smith feel petty, and that takes away from the parts where she’s got it right, as when she very justifiably shreds Bret Easton Ellis.

A lot of the more political content feels correct in spirit but shopworn, and the Yale Review Piece on this collection got a lot more right about the nature and purpose of criticism than this book did.

The most enjoyable part of this was Chu’s funny and poignant piece on Phantom of the Opera, which felt both fairly critical and entertaining. More of that would have gone a long way, as Chu’s writing is notably excellent and could be put to better use than it is for the most part here.

absolutely nobody does criticism like andrea long chu. even when i disagree with her, even when she is taking on books or shows or movies i adore, i relish reading her devastatingly sharp and witty observations. i'd read a few of these reviews before, and being able to add the reread of those and the discovery of others towards my reading challenge was a treat.

Catharsis: noun
1. reading Andrea Long Chu’s searingly critical and immensely clever reviews of books and authors you also dislike.

Chu takes aim and fires hitting the bullseye in each essay in this anthology. I was repeatedly stunned at the level of word play and wit in Chu’s take downs. I was equally stunned at the brilliance and research required to craft them. If you read books by love-them-or-hate-them authors like Ottessa Moshfegh or Hanya Yanagihara and fall on the hate side of the spectrum (I wouldn’t say I hate but I definitely don’t like) but can’t fully articulate your ideas of why you disliked them, read this book. Andrea Long Chu puts it better than you ever will be able to. This was initially what drew me to the book, and Authority lived up to that expectation completely.

But knowing nothing of Andrea Long Chu prior to reading this, I can say the stand out essay in the collection was On Liking Women, which was so well written, earnest and enlightening about trans desire and identity and the shortcomings of second wave feminism that I felt equal parts moved and educated by the end. It’s an essay I know I’ll reread.

My least favorite essay was actually the titular one about authority which traced the concept’s origins back to enlightenment thinkers and philosophers, ultimately calling for a reorientation in literary criticism that diminishes its long held central emphasis on authority. I found this essay long and droning, at times pedantic, and I lost the plot more than once. Honestly It just went over my head which I fully acknowledge may be because of my own shortcomings not Chu’s.

Writing this review of a master critic like Chu feels silly, knowing she could eviscerate it too with little effort, but I’m writing it anyway. Thanks netgalley for the E-arc!

This was my first exposure to Andrea Long Chu's writing, and was probably not the best way to be introduced to her work. There's no denying she's smart and a brilliant writer, with a way with words that would fit in amongst the literary greats of the 18th and 19th centuries. She is also 100% absolutely not inclined to pander to anyone with less than a university level of education and exposure to academic writing. Reading her Ivory Tower writing felt too much like work for a class that I no longer take.

I'd probably recommend this if you're a fan of her shorter-form writing, or if you have an academic interest in the art and study of criticism. However, I was not getting much enjoyment out of it, so I decided to move on.

I've followed Andrea Long Chu's criticism for a few years now, and whenever I see she's published something new, I immediately click. She is an incisive critic, and I've admired her (what could be called) takedowns of Hanya Yanagihara, Ottessa Moshfegh, and Bret Easton Ellis, among others. These essays, along with dozens of others, populate the new collection Authority. Revisiting, or newly reading, the previously published essays was a treat. I don't always agree with Long Chu's conclusions, but I appreciate her turns of phrase and her perspectives.

In addition to these sharper critiques, Long Chu tackles the question of authority and the role of criticism in the 21st century, tracing the historiography of criticism as an art. Her central thesis—that criticism must be embedded in its historical and social context—doesn't seem that radical, but it contradicts decades and centuries of the critic as an impartial judge of aesthetics, proclaiming taste based on some nebulous authority. I want to revisit that essay again because there was so much to unpack.

If you are a fan of literary criticism, definitely pick this one up.

"𝘓𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘷𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘮𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺, 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭; 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴, 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘑𝘰𝘩𝘯 𝘉𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘱𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘰𝘯𝘦. 𝘛𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳, 𝘐 𝘥𝘰 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘵𝘰 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴."

The kind of book to not only make you seem smarter, but actually try to be smarter to enrich critical thinking. I miss strong opinions. I miss the French. Heated conversations. Not debates. Just talks with passion.

"𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘧𝘧 𝘸𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘵 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘸𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯: 𝘐 𝘥𝘰 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩, 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘦𝘯𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘐 𝘥𝘰 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘮, 𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘴𝘵, 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘰𝘮."

New work. Old work. Revisitations. Refinement. Opinions change, fleshed out more, built upon, and it’s seeing the progression and change that I think informs the work of a great critic. Because we are led to freedom. Freedom from the entrapments of buzz words and blanket words.

"𝘕𝘰𝘵, 𝘐 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘺, '𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘰𝘮 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵' 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘪𝘵—𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘢 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘯𝘰𝘯𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘰𝘮; 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺."

Chu’s work master’s the ability to take stance and own it. The research is there. The bite too. It’s in the precision that a rhetoric is built, strong-willed and certain o provide a clarity to art.

“𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺: 𝘪𝘵 𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘰𝘮 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵, 𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘰𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴, 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘶𝘪𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘰𝘳."

Tackling people on like Bret Easton Ellis, Maggie Nelson, Hanya Yanagihara, and even Otessa Moshfegh, I am led to fatigue now with brainless one-liners on a site for reviews. I am bothered by the lack of time spent on leaving others with food for thought.

"𝘞𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘥; 𝘸𝘦 𝘥𝘰 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳. 𝘍𝘰𝘳 𝘮𝘺 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵, 𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘭𝘨𝘰. 𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘵 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘨𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘨𝘶𝘪𝘴𝘦, 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘮𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘦𝘯𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴, 𝘪𝘵 𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘮𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘦, 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺: 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘰 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘰 𝘪𝘵."

As readers, we should do better. And as people we should do better. And I mean this mostly for America. Look now. Now, at the state of things. A crumbling republic with a great uncertainty that will drown out not only great thinkers, but great thinking. Critical thinking. All thinking.

No one is safe, not even Hanya’s boys, as we know (https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/andrea-long-chu-new-york-magazine). Chu, an equal opportunist, doles out scrutiny to all of her pieces’ subjects.

She styles her unforgiving, sometimes unrelenting, assessments with her philosophical training in the academy, which peeks out with random biblical themes. She will not leave the beloved untouched because even sacred things are worth honestly engaging with again. Sometimes, she opts for a complete reassessment. This can be a freeing experience, not because I believe deconstruction as such should always win the argument, but because she sets a pattern for careful engagement with authority structures. In this sense, Authority is a worthwhile experience pedagogically. This is my more charitable reading of Chu’s methodology and use of critical authority.

A less charitable interpretation is being mean for the likes because human sociality dies in the comment section: the yo’ mama jokes fester still. I take her tactic as the former one, even though she doesn’t seek to be charitable (I know correlation isn’t causation, but it’s notable to me that I’m naturally drawn to write this review in the negative after putting down her book). She’s not interested in canceling culturally significant things (maybe except for Yellowstone—fine by me). A negative result of publishing polemical writing as one’s trademark technique is that others may follow suit. I hope critics (even a rando reviewer like me on GR) would have the sense to discern which tone to use and when. Chu’s recent writings in this compilation evolve from the older mince and mangle to something closer to macerate.

I appreciate Chu’s straightforward approach to evaluation, and the writing isn’t too funny, thankfully. There’s just enough salt on the choco chip cookie to intensify the experience; wit in the wrong critic’s hands causes hypertension. Not to belabor the point, but I needed a neutralizing cup of milk after re-reading her essay on Yanagihara. I could write my own essay (which would not be worth your salt) because I disagree with Chu on some points (e.g, “[B]y the fifteenth time, you wish he would aim”—is this sarcasm?). However, I concede the oddity of Hanya’s obsession with men-loving men characters for which Yanagihara does not publicly account.

Except for Part III (save the essay, Votes for Woman), Chu’s opinions stick with me. Her take on video games and TV shows mostly kept my attention, but I relished her work on ethnicity, race, gender, and politics. I would have preferred a focused volume on East Asian American culture and writing, queer experiences, and fiction writing at large, and in this order. I rate Authority 3.5 stars.

My thanks to Farrar, Straus and Giroux and NetGalley for an ARC. I shared this review on GoodReads on April 9, 2025 (https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/7415327217).

I did enjoy reading multiple essays and found her to be a very intelligent critic about a breadth of topics, particular the essay about Hanya Yanighara. While I did find her book compelling I had a more difficult time when the author centered herself and spoke about herself and her struggles. As a reader I'm not sure she needed to be the subject of her own essays.

I've been a big fan of Andrea Long Chu's work for New York Magazine the last few years, and this is a wonderful collection of that along with her previous work for n+1, plus a few new pieces and updates/cutting room floor bits.

The thing I like about Chu's work (even when it doesn't work for me, as with the title essay here, which applies her approach to Critics and Criticism writ large) is that you can tell she's done the work. She has read every book in your ouevre, watched every episode of your TV show, processed it, thought about it, and put her thoughts together in the most devastating way. That said, while ALC's takedowns are fun, it's even better when her thoroughness is in pursuit of something she enjoys.

Authority is an engaging, riveting, scandalous, introspective, challenging collection full of essential reading. With topics ranging from criticism and literature to pop culture, Chu is adept at addressing any topic with wit, candor, and a provocative yet well-informed eye. On Liking Women is one of the best essays I’ve ever read on gender and sexuality — and I love that Chu even approaches such complex topics with equal amounts of humor and seriousness. I laughed out loud and wrote things down, and will enjoy revisiting many of these stories whenever I need my brain shaken up.

It's one thing to be a hater and it's another to be a hater that is also a skilled communicator. Chu is an exceptionally skilled communicator and writer—her writing is pointed, clear, and incisive. This collection is interesting in that its topic of 'Authority' lends itself to allowing her to collect essays on an expansive range of topics that are only vaguely linked by the theme. As such, not every piece will be of interest to every reader. I was particularly interested in 'China Brain' and did not particularly care for her opening piece on the history of criticism—this was perhaps the most pretentious and tedious of her pieces.

Authority is an incisive essay collection by critic Andrea Long Chu, comprising previously published book reviews and long-form pieces, with two newly written essays serving as the collection’s bookends.

As someone who actively seeks out critical discourse on literature, film, and television, I was immediately drawn to this collection. I have a particular fondness for a well-executed pan—whether or not I agree with the critique—and Chu delivers plenty, as she is a hater to her core.

While I didn’t always align with her opinions, I especially appreciated her pointed critiques of A Little Life (a novel I personally enjoy) and Ottessa Moshfegh (an author whose work I adore). However, certain essays—such as the opening piece on the history of criticism and the collection’s titular essay—veered into territory that felt, at times, pretentious and, frankly, tedious.

Andrea Long Chu's "Authority: Essays” is structured into five sections, predominantly consisting of previously published essays. However, it commences with new material and integrates several other new pieces throughout the compilation. Chu's essays address both historical and contemporary topics, including her personal reflections on modern issues such as mental illness in her work "China Brain." The collection also examines current media, television shows, and renowned books by popular authors. This assortment offers diverse content that can engage and provoke thought among various readers. Her writing presents opinions and perspectives that are both insightful and witty.

Although every essay may not appeal to all readers, the anthology as a whole is commendable. Chu's writing is consistently clever, perceptive, and captivating. Regardless of your familiarity with the subjects, you will find yourself immersed in her world of thoughtful and well-researched critique.
Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, for an opportunity to review.