Almost twenty years ago I read a horrible review of a rather
mediocre book. Though I agreed with most
of the nasty comments the reviewer wrote, I felt uncomfortable with his mocking
tone. There were good things too, he might have mentioned. Imagine my surprise when the book soared to
record-breaking sales in the ensuing weeks in spite of, or because of, the
snide review. I concluded it's more
important to get reviewed than whether or not the review is positive.
A few years later I accepted the job of reviewing fiction
for Meridian magazine. My journalism
training had qualified me as a critic, but since I was writing fiction by that
time myself and knew how badly nasty comments concerning my writing could hurt,
I vowed to be kinder than some of the critics I knew and simply not review
books I thought didn't deserve any free publicity, point out flaws honestly but
charitably, and never ridicule a writer .
Over the many years I've been critiquing books I've pretty much stuck to
that philosophy, but have broadened it.
I still don't review books I seriously dislike, but that's not the only
reason I decline to review some books. Because I review LDS books, I generally
don't review books that are doctrinally questionable or negative toward the
Church, I try not to review several consecutive books in the same genre or by
the same author, I rarely review YA books, and sometimes my "to read"
stack is so tall, there's no way I can review every book in the pile. There are times too when a book doesn't
strike me as terrible, but it isn't anything special either, and since I
usually have plenty of books to review I go for the ones that make the biggest
impact on me, present something new and interesting, are memorable, or present
a fresh way of looking at an old problem. Sometimes I just get tired of
reviewing books in series. Occasionally I play catch-up and review a book on my
blog instead of for the magazine.
I have little patience with ridiculing an author's
work. Even books I consider boring or
trivial represent a great deal of work and effort. Finishing a book and getting
it published is a huge achievement and I applaud the effort.
I don't play the stars rating game on my review column or my
blog, though sometimes I do and sometimes I don't, on Good Reads. Often I forget to even make note there of
books I've read. Only once did I give a book a one star rating and that was
because the language was filthy and the author hadn't researched LDS policy. (The
author came unglued over my rating!) Rarely do I post a comment or review on
Good Reads. When I do it's because the
book made an impression, but I probably won't be reviewing it. Unfortunately I managed to hurt an author's feelings
recently because I made a brief comment (It wasn't negative), then didn't
review the book. I feel badly about this reaction because the book has some
very good passages, they just aren't linked well and the middle drags down an
excellent beginning and end, but the author shows real promise and I would hate
to be responsible for discouraging a writer through "faint praise."
Over the years I've noticed that I'm often the toughest on
some of the writers I admire most. I've
also noticed that the most truly professional writers never try to defend
themselves, but fix what was wrong in their next book or decide it's not worth
getting upset over and ignore a critic's fault finding. I've received some great thank you notes over
the years, one memorable one from an author whose book I came down kind of
heavy on, and I've watched many authors move from promising to favorites. When I first started writing fiction I could
count the number of LDS fiction writers on one hand, and now there are so many
I can't even name them all. When I began
reviewing, it sometimes became difficult because the other writers had all
become personal friends. I have to admit those early writers were great to
accept my criticism and give me the freedom to write about their work with
honesty.
In all my years as a journalist, the assignment I hated most
was writing obituaries, so when I write a review I keep in mind an old atheist
friend of my father's. He often
proclaimed that when he died he wanted a Mormon funeral so someone would say
something nice about him. I don't want
my reviews to be any book's obituary and honesty won't let me say wonderful
things about a book I don't think is wonderful.
So I'll go right on telling others what I think is great while
acknowledging there might be flaws.
Remember what I learned a long time ago--just getting reviewed means you
did something right.
6 comments:
It was great to get this perspective from you, Jenny. Thank you!
Oops, Jennie! Please don't review my spelling. ;)
.
I know what book you're talking about when you mention the one-star book. It might interest you to know that I did my due diligence and the only detail I was skeptical of (the letter of excommunication) was accurate. In fact, the author had found one through a friend of a friend and copied it almost verbatim. So I know what you say when you admit that sometimes reviewers completely misjudge works. It does happen.
Yes. Yes, I did come unglued at your review. Because you lied.
http://moriahjovan.com/mojo/jennie-hansen-is-a-liar
Jennie:
After your admission, above, how are we to believe that you really DID read all those books for which you wrote (and published) reviews?
Dishonest, hmmm?
God bbless
Post a Comment