Book Blog – Likely Stories, from Booklist Online » Blog Archive » Getting It Wrong and Being Mean about It?
Booklist Online

Booklist Online: More than 130,000 book reviews for librarians, book groups, and book lovers - from the trusted experts at the American Library Association

| | | | | | | | | | |
Book Blog - Likely Stories, by Keir Graff - Booklist Online

Likely Stories

A Booklist Blog
Keir Graff and editors from Booklist's adult and youth departments write candidly about books, book reviewing, and the publishing industry

« »

Thursday, October 25, 2007 10:03 am
Getting It Wrong and Being Mean about It?
Posted by: Keir Graff

If you haven’t been following it, there has been an interesting and thought-provoking series of posts on Galleycat about inaccuracy and negativity in book reviews. The jumping-off point is Alice Sebold’s The Almost Moon.

Oh, Mom, Poor Mom, The Critics Left You in the Freezer and I’m Feeling So Numb (10/22)

In response to Thursday’s item about the fumbling of a significant plot point in Lee Siegel‘s review of The Almost Moon, Boston Globe blogger Joshua Glenn points out that Siegel’s not the only one confused by the scene. And, heck, at least he didn’t get it as wrong as Susan Salter Reynolds did in the LA Times Book Review …

OK, We’re Shutting the Freezer Now… (10/23)

…but not before New York book reviewer Sam Anderson, one of several critics who came away from Alice Sebold’s The Almost Moon with the distinct impression that the protagonist had put her dead mother’s body in the freezer, explains how they all made the same mistake.

More on That Alleged NYTBR Mean Streak (10/23)

As I commented yesterday, beyond the question of whether or not any of the reviews in question are too “vicious,” there’s an interesting question as to whether or not it would be so awful if they were.

Could Critical Vitriol Be An Asset? (10/24)

Petit goes on to blame a sales-and-marketing mentality for confusing reviews with advertisements, and suggests consumers can learn as much from negative reviews as they can from positive ones.

You Want Real Mean? Try the Internet (10/24)

As publishers and authors venture online, particularly into forums that allow for interaction and direct feedback from consumers, they’re going to get their share of negativity. And the thing to remember is this: Nearly all of it is just psychic garbage, and though it sucks that this is the cost of putting yourself out there so you’re readily visible when your ideal reader comes looking for you, even if she doesn’t know you’re the one she’s looking for yet, that is the way it is, and you can’t let it keep you offline, any more than you did when Amazon.com started letting customers shoot their mouths off about your books.

More in Book Reviewer Gaffes, Biblical Division (10/24)

“Seems a little strange for a PW reviewer to call a children’s book ‘revisionist’ without stopping to consider that a story that’s been told for 2,000 years might, you know, have a few variations.”

Too Mean? Some Find Book Reviewers Overprotective (10/25)

Yesterday, I asked you how critical book reviewers should get, and at least one person on the mediabistro.com discussion board thinks that things among the literati have gotten a little too cozy. … (Fine, one might ask, but what are you doing here, a book review section or group therapy?)

Because of our recommended-only policy, people often make the mistake of thinking that Booklist only writes “nice” reviews. And it’s true that most Booklist reviews are positive. But what the policy really means is this: we’ll only review a book if we can recommend it in some way OR if you absolutely need to know about it. The first category includes a lot of reviews that include qualifiers (“Author A’s plotting is somewhat contrived, but fans of Amish harvest festivals will get all they bargained for and more”). And the second category includes books by authors with wide readership who will be left wondering if we don’t offer an opinion (“while this book is stunningly unimaginative when compared to the first three books in the series, Author B’s many fans can’t be expected to quit reading without finding out what happens”).

When it’s a book you don’t need to know about–say, a poorly written first novel–we just won’t run the review. Booklist‘s truly bad reviews are the ones we never publish, the “reject notes” that the reviewer sends to his or her editor. Panning a first novel doesn’t help our audience much and can be cruel to the author–although, if it’s a hugely hyped first novel whose release is highly anticipated, well, we just might make an exception.

In general, I think that negative reviews–not cruel reviews–are very helpful. There are so many books, and readers have so little time. Writing a review to be nice to the author (see the most recent post above) is kind to one person and cruel to many.

2 Responses to “Getting It Wrong and Being Mean about It?”
  1. oh Mom, poor fictional Mom — infotainment rules Says:

    [...] … your fictional daughter killed you and thought of putting your body in the freezer but couldn’t manage it and NYTBR reviewer Lee Siegel (among others) allegedly misunderstood a plot point in your book and now he’s supposed to feel bad? [...]

  2. oh Mom, poor fictional Mom « infotainment still rules Says:

    [...] oh Mom, poor fictional Mom By author … your fictional daughter killed you and thought of putting your body in the freezer but couldn’t manage it and NYTBR reviewer Lee Siegel (among others) allegedly misunderstood a plot point in your book and now he’s supposed to feel bad? [...]


Leave a Reply



© 2014 Booklist Online. Powered by WordPress.
Quoted material should be attributed to:
Keir Graff, Likely Stories (Booklist Online).




HOME | | AWARDS | GREAT READS | BLOGS | NEWSLETTERS | WEBINARS | MY ALERTS | MY LISTS | MY PROFILE | HELP | SUBSCRIBE
BOOKLIST PUBLICATIONS
American Library Association