CCBC-Net Archives
Reviews
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Norma Jean Sawicki <nsawicki_at_nyc.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:31:21 -0500
;
As a publisher, I believed and continue to believe that reviews are intended to serve the needs/interests of a publication’s subscribers/
readers rather than the interests of the writer or of the publisher. In children’s books, only School LIbrary Journal reviews all, or, most children’s books published in a given year and to my way of thinking, I prefer reviews to be succinct/ thoughtful so that more books can be reviewed in other publications. Unless it has changed, many librarians cannot, or, do not order a book unless it has three positive reviews; the writer whose book is reviewed in only one or two publications is sometimes devastated.
Not all writers are interested in reading reviews. For a variety of reasons, many writers ask reviews not be sent their way. Snippy, sarcastic, and mean spirited reviews ( as opposed to reviews that are
critical but thoughtful ) may entertain or amuse subscribers but their chief purpose is to draw attention to the so-called cleverness of the reviewer. Like the overly designed book that screams...look at
me, aren’t I beautiful, those reviewers scream....look at me....aren’t I clever; the book is subservient to the reviewer’s demand for attention. Pity the editor/publisher of a journal who does
not believe thoughtful reviews can engage their subscribers. So yes...some writers prefer not to read reviews nor is it always in their best interest to do so.
If I controlled the world, all reviews would be signed. Part of it has to do with taking responsibility for one’s observations ( which
encourages one to be thoughtful), and too, reviewers have different mindsets/sensibilities...and therefore reputations. There were certain reviewers whose observations I thought about..took seriously,
even if I disagreed with this or that, and others, I more or less ignored. Many librarians I knew/know do the same.
Many years ago, Betsy Hearne wrote a thoughtful and astute article about reviewing and made the case that in children’s books we do not
have a journal that publishes literary criticism. She was exactly right, and in the chair in which I sat/sit, such a journal, no matter
how well done, would not necessarily serve the needs of working librarians who depend on journals for guidance in developing their collections.
And, if I may...a rant. In reading reviews of adult books, one rarely
reads...adults will read this again and again, adults will love this or that, or adults will.... blah blah blah. I have been known to say that if anyone knows what all children think, or like/dislike, they should head to Washington, the country needs them. Said actually to assistants who were learning to write catalog/ flap copy with house policy being...no flat/general statements about children...the message being...the right book for the right kid at the right time.
On that note....there are editors /publishers who will agree to disagree with my observations...fair enough, is what I say. Norma Jean
Received on Mon 16 Nov 2009 10:31:21 AM CST
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:31:21 -0500
;
As a publisher, I believed and continue to believe that reviews are intended to serve the needs/interests of a publication’s subscribers/
readers rather than the interests of the writer or of the publisher. In children’s books, only School LIbrary Journal reviews all, or, most children’s books published in a given year and to my way of thinking, I prefer reviews to be succinct/ thoughtful so that more books can be reviewed in other publications. Unless it has changed, many librarians cannot, or, do not order a book unless it has three positive reviews; the writer whose book is reviewed in only one or two publications is sometimes devastated.
Not all writers are interested in reading reviews. For a variety of reasons, many writers ask reviews not be sent their way. Snippy, sarcastic, and mean spirited reviews ( as opposed to reviews that are
critical but thoughtful ) may entertain or amuse subscribers but their chief purpose is to draw attention to the so-called cleverness of the reviewer. Like the overly designed book that screams...look at
me, aren’t I beautiful, those reviewers scream....look at me....aren’t I clever; the book is subservient to the reviewer’s demand for attention. Pity the editor/publisher of a journal who does
not believe thoughtful reviews can engage their subscribers. So yes...some writers prefer not to read reviews nor is it always in their best interest to do so.
If I controlled the world, all reviews would be signed. Part of it has to do with taking responsibility for one’s observations ( which
encourages one to be thoughtful), and too, reviewers have different mindsets/sensibilities...and therefore reputations. There were certain reviewers whose observations I thought about..took seriously,
even if I disagreed with this or that, and others, I more or less ignored. Many librarians I knew/know do the same.
Many years ago, Betsy Hearne wrote a thoughtful and astute article about reviewing and made the case that in children’s books we do not
have a journal that publishes literary criticism. She was exactly right, and in the chair in which I sat/sit, such a journal, no matter
how well done, would not necessarily serve the needs of working librarians who depend on journals for guidance in developing their collections.
And, if I may...a rant. In reading reviews of adult books, one rarely
reads...adults will read this again and again, adults will love this or that, or adults will.... blah blah blah. I have been known to say that if anyone knows what all children think, or like/dislike, they should head to Washington, the country needs them. Said actually to assistants who were learning to write catalog/ flap copy with house policy being...no flat/general statements about children...the message being...the right book for the right kid at the right time.
On that note....there are editors /publishers who will agree to disagree with my observations...fair enough, is what I say. Norma Jean
Received on Mon 16 Nov 2009 10:31:21 AM CST
