Write Previews, not Reviews
Why can't book reviewers write reviews in which they leave their opinion out? Let's call them previews. Don't use any words that pass judgement. Don't be an arbiter. I mean, really, why do you think your opinion on the book matters? Plus, come on, you know you're lying a little. You didn't like that book that much, but the writing world is a small world and, sadly, back scratching does go a long way. So, you throw in words like "strong," "impressive," "haunting," or some other adjective. Leave opinion out, and you don't risk being dishonest or, worse -- like with a bad review -- being a self-important poison.
Keep your opinion to yourself. Just preview the book.
What’s the point of book reviews? At their most basic level, they should give readers an idea as to what the book is about. They should give readers a taste of the kind of sentences they might be reading. Readers should leave with an idea of theme and quality of writing.
A book review should do the following things.
Give the title, author, and publisher of the book. In general, say what the writer writes about. Don’t give an opinion. Just let the reader know what to expect. Provide a sample. Give ten random (not hand-picked) sentences from the piece to give the reader some idea as to how this writer expresses herself. Again, keep your opinion to yourself. If you have to give your opinion, give some opinion as to what you think the writer hopes to express with their writing.
Okay, so here’s how a brief preview of a book might read.
Fausto’s Afternoon (Whistling Shade Press) is a collection of short stories by Jarda Cervenka. Cervenka’s are stories of the world. He writes stories that take place in South America, Russia, Africa, Europe and even Minnesota. His main characters, mostly Americans, often are jarred into a different understanding of the world by their non-American experiences. Cervenka seems to suggest that we, as Americans, get too locked into one way of viewing the world. Cervenka’s writing brings the reader into the world, not just the American world, but the world at large.
In “Celebrated Navigation,” Cervenka writes of Ivanek, a homeless man in the Czech Republic who finds himself briefly in the limelight when the local river floods:
“People started to run away, pushing and shouting, pointing at their feet, stepping high. The hungry, wild river spilled over the sidewalk. The flood arrived onto the street and everybody was on the move. At that moment, the Old Town became the edge of a swimming pool for feces, rats, and butts.
Ivanek found himself alone, his bare feet ankle high in the flowing dirt. A pair of soaked unused cigarettes floated by his feet, one lonely used condom, this ever present whitefish of Vltava, following behind. Because he still saw her copper hair and her face, he could comprehend only a little of what was happening around him. It took some time before he turned around to survey the river, but he did not worry. He had arrived with the flood. While stooping in dejection at this moment he was not a hopeless homeless, no, not Ivanek, the man with friends.”
In Fausto’s Afternoon, Cervenka seems to want to shake his American reader into seeing the world for all of its mystery – and seeing that exposure to such mystery can be life-giving.
Keep your opinion to yourself. Just preview the book.
What’s the point of book reviews? At their most basic level, they should give readers an idea as to what the book is about. They should give readers a taste of the kind of sentences they might be reading. Readers should leave with an idea of theme and quality of writing.
A book review should do the following things.
Give the title, author, and publisher of the book. In general, say what the writer writes about. Don’t give an opinion. Just let the reader know what to expect. Provide a sample. Give ten random (not hand-picked) sentences from the piece to give the reader some idea as to how this writer expresses herself. Again, keep your opinion to yourself. If you have to give your opinion, give some opinion as to what you think the writer hopes to express with their writing.
Okay, so here’s how a brief preview of a book might read.
Fausto’s Afternoon (Whistling Shade Press) is a collection of short stories by Jarda Cervenka. Cervenka’s are stories of the world. He writes stories that take place in South America, Russia, Africa, Europe and even Minnesota. His main characters, mostly Americans, often are jarred into a different understanding of the world by their non-American experiences. Cervenka seems to suggest that we, as Americans, get too locked into one way of viewing the world. Cervenka’s writing brings the reader into the world, not just the American world, but the world at large.
In “Celebrated Navigation,” Cervenka writes of Ivanek, a homeless man in the Czech Republic who finds himself briefly in the limelight when the local river floods:
“People started to run away, pushing and shouting, pointing at their feet, stepping high. The hungry, wild river spilled over the sidewalk. The flood arrived onto the street and everybody was on the move. At that moment, the Old Town became the edge of a swimming pool for feces, rats, and butts.
Ivanek found himself alone, his bare feet ankle high in the flowing dirt. A pair of soaked unused cigarettes floated by his feet, one lonely used condom, this ever present whitefish of Vltava, following behind. Because he still saw her copper hair and her face, he could comprehend only a little of what was happening around him. It took some time before he turned around to survey the river, but he did not worry. He had arrived with the flood. While stooping in dejection at this moment he was not a hopeless homeless, no, not Ivanek, the man with friends.”
In Fausto’s Afternoon, Cervenka seems to want to shake his American reader into seeing the world for all of its mystery – and seeing that exposure to such mystery can be life-giving.
posted by Jeff Vande Zande at 10:23 PM
3 Comments:
I don't really agree with you--a review is an opinion, even if it boils down to just a thumbs up or thumbs down (and the last sentence in your review is an opinion, just one about what the content is rather than what the quality is)--but I did read this post over at Harper's that made me think of your post. It's about Wyatt Mason getting called out by readers for over enthusiastic reviewing:
Die a Painful Death
That's the name of the article, not a suggestion, by the way. Hopefully I'll get to see you guys next week!
Hi Matt,
Sure, I was meaning to be a bit of a provocateur with this post. I just wonder whether our compulsion to judge -- when it comes to book reviews -- is necessary. Why can't we just preview the book?
I think things have gotten a little dicey since so many writers have become reviewers (I see this in my own reviewing some times). The writing world is a small world -- where having contacts and friends certainly doesn't hurt a writer. Making enemies certainly doesn't help. So, it's not unusual to talk up a book more than it deserves. Or, to have a policy of "try to find something good to say" -- which isn't really reviewing, either. It's stretching.
Plus, bad reviews (though there are few) can be so damning.
People listen to bad reviews and turn away from books.
But why? Based on some authoritative-sounding stranger's opinion? That's ridiculous.
I think of Moby Dick. I hate all the chapters about whaling and rope. My father-in-law loved them. So, who am I to give the book a thumbs-down and possibly make a guy like my father-in-law turn away from a book that he would love if he had the chance to experience it on his own terms.
I understand that a review is supposed to judge. My question is why? Why do we feel this need to judge?
We can still talk plenty about a book without stating our personal opinion of quality.
I think opinions--even ones you don't agree with-- are valuable because you learn to trust a reviewer over time. For instance, I read Dan's reviews over at EWN, and over the course of the last few years, I've gotten a pretty good idea that we have similar taste in books. So if he loves something, I probably would too. So his opinion carries a lot of weight for me.
Just reading a random review by someone I've never read before doesn't do much for me one way or the other. If he's trashing a book I like, i just assume he's wrong. If he's hyping a book I hated, then same story. It's only over time that a reviewer's opinion gains credibility.
Negative reviews actually work the same way-- The more reviews a writer does, the more negative ones they do, and the more critical even their positive ones become. So a James Wood or a John Updike are more critical than most people. Someone's who has only written one review probably wrote a pretty glowing one. If you come out of the gate trying to crush people, you are going to make enemies. You're right about that. But if you're a well-respected critic with a lifetime of work behind you, maybe you're just right when you hate something.
(Which isn't always the case-- Updike did a takedown on Michel Houellebecq a year or two ago that just made Updike sound like he didn't understand the book.)
The only writers who get "bad" reviews are big name writers. No one trashes an indie author. What's the point? People don't want to see writers they've never heard of trashed. It's boring.
For myself, I only review books I'd recommend, because I'm not going to waste my time or the time of the people who read my reviews. Life's too short to babble on about books I don't like. I'd rather review books I do-- Which doesn't mean I can't be critical. I try to point out any criticisms I have, but within limited space I'd again rather prove the positive and just mention the negative.
A point about bad reviews. Norman Mailer's last novel, The Castle in the Forest, got a 47% across all its reviews (as determined by metacritic), but was a New York Times bestseller. The thirty or so reviews--of which more than half were negative--still build a critical buzz about the book. It came up in a lot of conversations I had with people around then, but I don't know anyone who was actually planning on reading the thing. So why were we talking about it? Because it was in the news. And then you walk into the bookstore, and that book you keep reading about is on the front table, and you pick it up, and half the book selling battle is already won, no matter what the reviews say.
But none of this really answers your question, which I guess maybe I can't either.
Why give opinions in reviews? Because that's what reviews are. Books already have jacket copy, which is what your "preview" reads like. It's sort of like a short story with nothing to say (and we both know how you feel about that). It's just words. It's nice to get a little excerpt of the book, but you'd get that in a standard review too. People read reviews FOR the opinions. I guarantee you. It's why reviews are entertaining, and why they're worth discussing with other people.
Post a Comment
<< Home