Reviewing the reviews

Every Reader A Reviewer, Library Journal 9/1/10

What a tremendous article in the 9/1 issue of Library Journal, and timely for the start of this blog, with its focus on sharing media.

I have always divided book reviews into two categories in my mind – promotional and critical.  I have written both, and the perspective of each is quite different.  I did promotional, pre-publication reviews for a while in the mid-90s for a small magazine out of Pennsylvania.  While there was a critical/evaluatory aspect to them, that was intended to highlight the best aspects of the manuscript, and in fact reviewers were instructed to return the manuscript if we could not give a positive review (said manuscript would be routed to another reviewer at that point).  Reviews like this were sometimes excerpted on the covers/jackets of the books upon publication – every once in a while, I can find my quotes on some mid-90s paperbacks, in fact.  

Critical reviews, on the other hand, are much more familiar to the general public – Michiko Kakitani of the New York Times Book Review is the most well-known critical reviewer at the moment.  The reviews themselves can range from insightful essays that are worth reading all on their own (Roger Ebert’s film criticism, for example) to unreadable, impenetrable opinionating….with usefulness that varies accordingly.  I have never been a fan of the literary sort of review, and did not use NYTBR for book selection in my library career, because I did not feel it was as relevant to my audience as, say, talking to them about what they liked and observing what was popular. 

I love that blogs and consumer reviews are so readily available – they start, support and continue the conversation about books/movies/music/what have you.  I have always maintained that it does not matter what you read – just read.  I get frustrated when a person only reads one genre/author/subject  -- there is so much out there to explore and appreciate.