CCBC-Net Archives
Re: Reviewing
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Robin Gibson <gibsonr_at_denison.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:35:42 -0500
I've really been enjoying all the discussion about reviewing, and I especially liked Dean's use of the word "painful" in writing a negative review or even just in regard to including something negative within a review. Positive reviews are so much easier for me to write than negative ones. Though not trying to please an author, I understand the care and time and effort an author has spent in crafting their work, and
I take the responsibility of reviewing very seriously. Composing thoughtful and critical comments take more attention and deliberation on
my part. These books receive the multiple re-readings others have talked
about (even though I might rather spend my time reading something else!)
It's a delight to review a wonderful book, one you really think deserves
a star, that just screams notable. You're excited to tell others about it! Yet critical reviews are very valuable. As a librarian I also took the responsibility of purchasing and managing a budget very seriously as
well, so critical reviews were essential to the selection process. That said, I don't recall ever not selecting a book on the basis of a single negative review (perhaps on the basis of a single positive one from a well-know author, recommended by a reviewer I trust, or on several of the Notable/Best Books type lists).
Robin Gibson Granville, Ohio
Dean Schneider wrote: On fact checking:
Several times over the years, I have caught errors--from copy editing to factual, minor and major--and been able to report them to my editor wh o then contacts the publisher, and there has been time for the publisher to make changes in the finished copy. Of course this only works if I have read the advanced reader copy well ahead of schedule (which I tend to do ), but it's a way for reviewers and writers to--pun intended--be on the s ame page in the name of a stronger book. What's distressing is when major problems are caught and there's NOT time to correct them, until subseque nt editions. Lots of reviewers have that internal voice while reading a r eally good book and cheering it on, hoping it finishes as well as it has started. Reviewers love to celebrate the well-crafted books, but it's pai nful though necessary to comment on major problems with a book, where the story doesn't work as well as it might have. A good reviewer doesn't inc lude negative analyses lightheartedly, though I know there are reviewe rs out there who too often write with venomous pens (or cantankerous keyboar ds?).
Dean Schneider Ensworth school Nashville, Tennessee
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:35:42 -0500
I've really been enjoying all the discussion about reviewing, and I especially liked Dean's use of the word "painful" in writing a negative review or even just in regard to including something negative within a review. Positive reviews are so much easier for me to write than negative ones. Though not trying to please an author, I understand the care and time and effort an author has spent in crafting their work, and
I take the responsibility of reviewing very seriously. Composing thoughtful and critical comments take more attention and deliberation on
my part. These books receive the multiple re-readings others have talked
about (even though I might rather spend my time reading something else!)
It's a delight to review a wonderful book, one you really think deserves
a star, that just screams notable. You're excited to tell others about it! Yet critical reviews are very valuable. As a librarian I also took the responsibility of purchasing and managing a budget very seriously as
well, so critical reviews were essential to the selection process. That said, I don't recall ever not selecting a book on the basis of a single negative review (perhaps on the basis of a single positive one from a well-know author, recommended by a reviewer I trust, or on several of the Notable/Best Books type lists).
Robin Gibson Granville, Ohio
Dean Schneider wrote: On fact checking:
Several times over the years, I have caught errors--from copy editing to factual, minor and major--and been able to report them to my editor wh o then contacts the publisher, and there has been time for the publisher to make changes in the finished copy. Of course this only works if I have read the advanced reader copy well ahead of schedule (which I tend to do ), but it's a way for reviewers and writers to--pun intended--be on the s ame page in the name of a stronger book. What's distressing is when major problems are caught and there's NOT time to correct them, until subseque nt editions. Lots of reviewers have that internal voice while reading a r eally good book and cheering it on, hoping it finishes as well as it has started. Reviewers love to celebrate the well-crafted books, but it's pai nful though necessary to comment on major problems with a book, where the story doesn't work as well as it might have. A good reviewer doesn't inc lude negative analyses lightheartedly, though I know there are reviewe rs out there who too often write with venomous pens (or cantankerous keyboar ds?).
Dean Schneider Ensworth school Nashville, Tennessee
---Received on Mon 16 Nov 2009 10:35:42 AM CST
