CCBC-Net Archives
Reviewing from a Reviewer's Perspective
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Diane Foote <dianebfoote_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:57:22 -0600
Hello CCBC-Net!
I'm excited about this topic and eager to hear from other reviewers as well as those who read and use the reviews. I've reviewed/written for 3 professional journals, BOOKLIST, BOOK LINKS, and KIRKUS. Each of the major children's book review sources (BOOKLIST, THE BULLETIN OF THE CENTER FOR CHILDREN'S BOOKS, HORN BOOK, KIRKUS, PW, and SLJ, among others) has its own particular goal/focus. PUBLISHERS WEEKLY reviews are intended for a bookselling audience; SLJ for a school library media specialist audience; BOOKLIST for a public AND school librarian audience, etc., although each informs the others' audiences. Booksellers pay attention to the library journals and vice versa. Each has a staff of editor/s who rely on the expertise and opinions of their stable of reviewers, while reserving the right and responsibility to edit when necessary.
When writing reviews in general I do consider the goal/focus of the journal. But first, my allegiance is to THE BOOK: I first read books from start to finish, trying hard not to come to them with preconceived questions such as, is this for a general audience, or best for curriculum use, or ??? I just try to READ them all the way through, once first, and attempt to get a feel for what each book is, and what it is trying to do. Entertain? Educate? Both? After that, I think about the audience of the journal and what they might want to know about this book.
The reviews BOOKLIST publishes are mostly recommendations. That doesn't mean they recommend all libraries, bookstores, and parents purchase all books. That means the books they choose to review have at least some merit, perhaps for a wide audience, perhaps for a narrow audience. They do not review all books published in a given year, although they do consider nearly everything; they are selective. BOOKLIST reviews are also critical. Even though each book they review is deemed to have some potential audience, design, textual, or conceptual flaws; challenging concepts, presentations, and language, etc.; and the like are duly noted. KIRKUS publishes both recommended and not-recommended reviews, as does SLJ (I personally haven't reviewed for SLJ so I'll refrain from commenting much on their process). I would like to hear from those who use the reviews which approach they feel is most useful: Is it better to read a journal in which all items reviewed are recommended, although not all books are reviewed, so that y ou do not waste time reading about books you will not end up buying; or is it better to peruse a comprehensive source of reviews of all books, even if only (say) half are books you are interested in purchasing?
I have declined to review a few books for BOOKLIST on the basis that they cannot be recommended to anyone; however, this happens infrequently as most books have SOMEONE to whom they would appeal. In addition to children's books, I also review parenting and adoption books for adults for BOOKLIST, and I must say I reject a higher percentage of the adult titles than I do children's books.
In reviewing a particular book, after first reading it through to get a "feel" for it (is it funny? thought-provoking? informative? heartrending? gorgeously illustrated? provocative? is it APPEALING? Will it "touch" someone?, etc.), I try to assess its audience; that is, the audience for the BOOK, not for the review journal. If the book is for young children, is the vocabulary suitable for them? Are the illustrations concrete, or abstract? Do the concepts/themes match the presentation/vocabulary/design? If there is a sophisticated concept presented in a format accessible to new readers, that tells me something about the audience (and there is one for this type of book, for sure, but this needs to be noted in a review). If the book is nonfiction, are sources noted? If the book is fiction but based on fact, is that made clear somehow? How do the illustrations and text complement each other? Are they compatible/consistent? If the book is supposed to be realistic, to what extent does it reflect the current state
of youth in its particular setting? If it is historical, fiction or otherwise, does it accurately portray the sensibilities of the time, perhaps with some context to help contemporary readers relate to a different time and place?
In a way, I feel like a reviewer's job is NOT to decide what should or should not be published and/or available to young readers. It is an author's/Illustrator's/publisher's job to write, illustrate, and produce the best books it is possible for them to make. It is the job of a parent, librarian, teacher, or bookseller to make a wide variety of materials available to kids, and make judgements based on a particular kid's interests and abilites. It seems to me to be the reviewer's job to assess the material available and give the parents, librarians, teachers, booksellers, and KIDS, the tools they need to pick the right reading materials.
Okay, this is really long. Hope to hear from some more of you! Foote
Received on Sun 08 Nov 2009 11:57:22 PM CST
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:57:22 -0600
Hello CCBC-Net!
I'm excited about this topic and eager to hear from other reviewers as well as those who read and use the reviews. I've reviewed/written for 3 professional journals, BOOKLIST, BOOK LINKS, and KIRKUS. Each of the major children's book review sources (BOOKLIST, THE BULLETIN OF THE CENTER FOR CHILDREN'S BOOKS, HORN BOOK, KIRKUS, PW, and SLJ, among others) has its own particular goal/focus. PUBLISHERS WEEKLY reviews are intended for a bookselling audience; SLJ for a school library media specialist audience; BOOKLIST for a public AND school librarian audience, etc., although each informs the others' audiences. Booksellers pay attention to the library journals and vice versa. Each has a staff of editor/s who rely on the expertise and opinions of their stable of reviewers, while reserving the right and responsibility to edit when necessary.
When writing reviews in general I do consider the goal/focus of the journal. But first, my allegiance is to THE BOOK: I first read books from start to finish, trying hard not to come to them with preconceived questions such as, is this for a general audience, or best for curriculum use, or ??? I just try to READ them all the way through, once first, and attempt to get a feel for what each book is, and what it is trying to do. Entertain? Educate? Both? After that, I think about the audience of the journal and what they might want to know about this book.
The reviews BOOKLIST publishes are mostly recommendations. That doesn't mean they recommend all libraries, bookstores, and parents purchase all books. That means the books they choose to review have at least some merit, perhaps for a wide audience, perhaps for a narrow audience. They do not review all books published in a given year, although they do consider nearly everything; they are selective. BOOKLIST reviews are also critical. Even though each book they review is deemed to have some potential audience, design, textual, or conceptual flaws; challenging concepts, presentations, and language, etc.; and the like are duly noted. KIRKUS publishes both recommended and not-recommended reviews, as does SLJ (I personally haven't reviewed for SLJ so I'll refrain from commenting much on their process). I would like to hear from those who use the reviews which approach they feel is most useful: Is it better to read a journal in which all items reviewed are recommended, although not all books are reviewed, so that y ou do not waste time reading about books you will not end up buying; or is it better to peruse a comprehensive source of reviews of all books, even if only (say) half are books you are interested in purchasing?
I have declined to review a few books for BOOKLIST on the basis that they cannot be recommended to anyone; however, this happens infrequently as most books have SOMEONE to whom they would appeal. In addition to children's books, I also review parenting and adoption books for adults for BOOKLIST, and I must say I reject a higher percentage of the adult titles than I do children's books.
In reviewing a particular book, after first reading it through to get a "feel" for it (is it funny? thought-provoking? informative? heartrending? gorgeously illustrated? provocative? is it APPEALING? Will it "touch" someone?, etc.), I try to assess its audience; that is, the audience for the BOOK, not for the review journal. If the book is for young children, is the vocabulary suitable for them? Are the illustrations concrete, or abstract? Do the concepts/themes match the presentation/vocabulary/design? If there is a sophisticated concept presented in a format accessible to new readers, that tells me something about the audience (and there is one for this type of book, for sure, but this needs to be noted in a review). If the book is nonfiction, are sources noted? If the book is fiction but based on fact, is that made clear somehow? How do the illustrations and text complement each other? Are they compatible/consistent? If the book is supposed to be realistic, to what extent does it reflect the current state
of youth in its particular setting? If it is historical, fiction or otherwise, does it accurately portray the sensibilities of the time, perhaps with some context to help contemporary readers relate to a different time and place?
In a way, I feel like a reviewer's job is NOT to decide what should or should not be published and/or available to young readers. It is an author's/Illustrator's/publisher's job to write, illustrate, and produce the best books it is possible for them to make. It is the job of a parent, librarian, teacher, or bookseller to make a wide variety of materials available to kids, and make judgements based on a particular kid's interests and abilites. It seems to me to be the reviewer's job to assess the material available and give the parents, librarians, teachers, booksellers, and KIDS, the tools they need to pick the right reading materials.
Okay, this is really long. Hope to hear from some more of you! Foote
Received on Sun 08 Nov 2009 11:57:22 PM CST
