Saturday's Globe and Mail included a substantial review of Eric Adams and Jordan Stanger-Ross's book Challenging Exile, the account of Japanese Canadian citizens facing the Canadian government's determination to exile them by the thousands to Japan after the end of the Second World War. (We noted the book here last week in an Osgoode Society roundup.)
John Ibbitson calls it "a superb chronicle."
You might read the review for the big picture summary Ibbitson provides about what was attempted in 1945-46. But right off he says the book is:
essential reading for anyone who cares about our country’s past.
Then there is the headline the Globe gives the review. It takes Ibbitson's phrase and turns it into
essential reading for history buffs
What is a history buff? Are there sports "buffs"? Economics buffs? Differential calculus buffs? "History buff" always seems essentially condescending and demeaning, a way for the headline writer to tell us he (gotta be he) would not be caught dead reading this stuff, no matter what this guy Ibbitson thinks. Sure, headline writers need to save space, but wouldn't "essential reading for anyone" have done as well?