ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Although I love the strange field of Buffy studies, which combines two of my hobbies - watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer and reading academic literature for pleasure - I can understand why a Times Higher review of an academic book on Buffy might be a little sniffy ("Works up to a pointy", February ). Buffy studies seems more an ethereal pleasure than a weighty discipline, and it has a long way to go before it proves itself as relevant to our understanding of humanity as Shakespearean studies or medieval history.

I am a little puzzled, however, by your choice of reviewer. Surely a book on language in a television series should be reviewed by a language or media studies scholar (and preferably one with an informed interest in Buffy)?

Most other reviews in The Times Higher are allocated to specialists in the discipline and subject of the book. There is not a lot of politics or economics in Buffy slang, so why ask for a review from the director of the London School of Economics?

Thomas Larque
University of Kent