Book Reviewing: Literary Criticism or Hatchet Job?

Brad raised his hand.

“Yes, Mr. Smith, you have a question?” Dr. C. asked, stuffing his lecture notes into his leather briefcase, the one that looked as if an M48 tank had run over it.

“I do, sir. How do you read all those books you review for the American Historical Association’s journal? I mean, where do you find the time?”

Dr. C. smiled and opened his mouth as if to say something snarky, as he usually did. Then he paused, shrugged his shoulders, and said,” Oh well, I guess I’d better be honest with you. I don’t read them all the way through.”

A hint of a chuckle escaped his wide mouth, as if he were an altar boy at confession, relaying some embarrassing teenage angst.

“You see, I start with the introduction, read the table of contents, and the conclusion. If there’s an index, and there usually is, I skim through it. And the bibliography, of course. If I don’t know the author, I’ll read the section about the author, too. And I’ll skim through a few of the more interesting-sounding chapters.”

He glanced at Brad. And winked.

But then he added, “Book reviewing is serious business. It can make or break an author’s career sometimes. So, while it sounds as if I don’t take it seriously, I do. I review books in a field I’ve studied for twenty-five years. I know the literature and the players in the arena, so to speak. But you don’t. Not yet. No shortcuts, OK?”

“No shortcuts” suggests there’s a standard pattern for most book reviews, the art of which has a time-honored history. Photios I of Constantinople, known as “the inventor of the book-review” for his work, Bibliotheca, may have been the first literary critic. And the New York Times’s Sunday book section has published book reviews for over 125 years, setting standards in book reviewing.

Standards

But as Jay A. Fernandez writes in “13 Common Mistakes in Book Reviewing and How to Avoid Them,” some reviewers don’t always follow standards. He takes those reviewers to task for multiple sins and foibles, including inserting ego and hyperbole into the works. Nevertheless, the article is worth reading for many reasons, particularly concerning conflicts of interest when reviewing books.

Take note of item 13 on Mr. Fernandez’s list:

Conflict of Interest

Do not review anything by anyone you know or have had more than glancing contact with in your professional or personal life. The reason for this should be obvious. Otherwise, authors may as well get their mothers to write the reviews. This goes for grudges, too. That kind of vengeful ambush is cheap and damages the publication that gave it a forum as much as it does the author and reviewer.

If the review is to appear in the local newspaper or a publication such as The Millions, it should include a disclaimer saying the reviewer received an advanced reading copy (ARC) in return for a fair and impartial review. Or, at the very least, the reviewer should add that they know the author through such things as school or childhood.

Unfortunately, independently published authors find it challenging to garner the same types of reviews reserved for those who publish with traditional publishers. Suppose you ask people you know to review your books? Amazon, at this point in time, appears to be accepting of most reviews written for books by authors known to the reviewer.

Regardless of the number of words or where a book review appears, be it Amazon or The Times Literary Supplement, there’s something else to be mindful of when writing book reviews.

Be Fair

Take Mr. Fernandez’s last remark about “vengeful ambush.” That statement recalls the Golden Rule. Apply it when reviewing another author’s work.

• Don’t be cruel in your assessment of the book.
• Avoid personal or derogatory comments about the author.
• Be fair in judging the work.

If you’ve never written a book, it’s unlikely that you truly know what it takes to conceive of such a project, much less finish it from beginning to end. An editor once told a writer I know, who was bemoaning a less-than-kind review, “Well, how many books has HE written?” referring of course to the hapless reviewer.

Humility, in other words, goes a long way!

And, take note: you are reviewing the book in your hands, not the one you wish the author had written.

Since books usually come in the form of fiction or nonfiction, the focus changes depending on the type you’re reviewing.

Reviewing Nonfiction

As a nonfiction book reviewer, you are charged with:

• introducing the book and the author, usually just a sentence stating the book’s focus. Mention the author’s background—this allows readers to judge the author’s  “authority” and qualifications for writing the book,
• outlining its contents concisely without giving away the juicy bits,
• highlighting sections of the book by discussing particular chapters or themes, and providing a detailed evaluation of the book’s merit, which might include titles of similar books or the work of authors with related topics.

Reviewing Fiction

Reviewing fiction requires a slightly different approach.

In reviewing fiction (or works of poetry), consider:

• introducing the book and the author in a sentence summing up the general theme or genre (coming-of-age, romance, mystery, sci-fi, etc.,
• avoiding any revelation of the entire plot by saying something like, “It’s a story about a girl who chases after a rabbit and has many adventures with a bunch of weird characters.” (aka Alice in Wonderland),
• including a few statements about characterization, plot twists (without giving away the juicy bits, remember!),
• commenting on aspects of the book that you liked or didn’t much like, and why not,
• concluding with a statement about who should read the book, perhaps adding recommendations for similar books.

Length of Reviews

How long should a book review be?

Much depends on a publication’s guidelines. But a 1000-word piece will do the job quite nicely. Actually, that’s a very generous word count these days. I rarely went over 500 words when I reviewed books for The Roanoke Times. The book review editor there hammered on the idea of conciseness. But for Library Journal and other similar publications, 125 to 200 words suddice

As for Dr. C.’s method and the madness of book reviewing, it worked for him. Maybe it even worked for Brad. But I don’t recommend it. However, I do recommend studying the work of book reviewers such as Michael Dirda of the Washington Post, and reviews in the New York Times and The New York Review of Books.

I’ll let Toni Morrison have the last word on book reviews:

The unflattering reviews are painful for short periods of time; the badly written ones are deeply, deeply insulting. That reviewer took no time to really read the book. 

For more on book reviewing, see:

From Cover to Cover: Evaluating and Reviewing Children’s Books, by Kathleen T. Horning

“The Benefits of Writing Book Reviews,” by Sam Risak, for Writer’s Digest

You may also be able to find a paying gig for reviewing books. Check out “Get Paid to Read.”

[Editor’s note: WAG would love to see articles on any and all topics of interest to writers. Please send your ideas or finished pieces to Cynthia D. Bertelsen at BlogEditor@writersalliance.org for consideration. Remember: these posts are more than just posts, for they are actual articles and can be cited in your CV/résumé in the same way you would a short story, essay, or any other writing credit you may possess.]