What I meant is that reviewers set out to write good reviews, but constraints work against them: deadlines can force them to read and write quickly, a lack of space can force them to leave out important points, low fees limit the time they can devote to a book, the pressure to be “lively” too often leads to snappy rather than thoughtful writing. In the end, whatever reviewers’ intentions, reviews are often poorly written, poorly argued, filled with clichés and overpraise.
Do you think there's a lot of 'facile praise' among online review sites as opposed to print publications? If yes, why?
I think there’s a lot of facile praise both in print and online, and on the whole I believe the reasons are similar. One central reason is that we tend to think that being “fair” means being kind to the author rather than honest to the reader. The tendency to praise too highly is a tradition firmly embedded in American reviewing. I think it’s embedded in American culture.
There are some bloggers out there who have acquired fame as tough reviewers
because of their harsh, nasty, mean reviews. What, in your opinion, is behind their philosophy?
I think they’re trying to show how smart they are, especially how much smarter than the author whose book they’re writing about. These reviews seem to me more about self-promotion than criticism. But this isn’t limited to bloggers. Nasty reviewing has a long history in print, and there are some good satirical essays mocking this kind of oneupmanship.
If a book is terrible, do you think a reviewer should write and publish the
review, or should she decline to write it?
If a reviewer finds a book so poorly conceived and written there’s nothing of interest to say about it, I don’t think she should review it. But to some degree the decision depends on the book and the aims of the reviewer or publication. Some books are bad in significant ways — they reveal a trend in writing or thinking that’s worth discussing. And there are weak books written by well-known authors that readers will want to know about, good or bad — but they need to be reviewed honestly: the reviewer has to guard against being intimidated by the famous name.
In your opinion, how influential are reviews on the consumer?
Article comments
1 - Kevin Eagan
Excellent interview, Gail and Mayra! Gail has a very intriguing perspective on book reviewing, and I definitely plan to check out her book.
2 - A. F. Stewart
Exceptional interview. As long as there are dedicated reviewers, I don't think good reviews will become an endangered species.
3 - c hoare
It is really beneficial to be able to read an interview with someone as long experienced in the field as Gail Pool. A coup, Mayra.
Chris H.
4 - Margay
Another great interview! I am sorry to see this series end because I have learned so much from reading it. Thank you, Gail,for all of your insights into the world of reviewing. And thank you, Mayra, for conducting this series. It's been a joy to read.