Should Authors Listen to Book Reviewers?

Dr. Samuel Johnson (1709-1784), one of the first great literary critics, gave to his friend, the novelist Fanny Burney, the following three rules for writers when considering the opinions of book reviewers:

There are three distinct kinds of judges upon all new authors or productions; the first are those who know no rules, but pronounce entirely from their natural taste and feelings; the second are those who know and judge by the rules; and the third are those who know, but are above the rules. These last are those you should wish to satisfy. Next to them rate the natural judges; but ever despise those opinions that are formed by the rules (quoted in “Fanny Burney” (1903) by Austin Dobson).

Dr. Johnson’s advice still holds true today. A book reviewer’s job is not solely to summarize a book but to be a critic, one who encourages good and potentially good authors, and when needed, points out mistakes to poor authors, but with the purpose to make them better. A good critic does not simply abide by the rules but encourages the evolution of literature through pushing boundaries and commending those authors who successfully entertain and advance their genre. If every author had followed the rules or cowered before critics who demanded obedience to rules, we would have no books by William Faulkner, James Joyce, Kurt Vonnegut Jr. and many other experimental authors, and while all readers may not enjoy experimental fiction, even the novel itself—the very reason for its name—was novel in Dr. Johnson’s time.

A book reviewer is the gatekeeper of what is read and which books deserve attention, but readers should also judge a book for themselves, not by the cover and not solely by the book review. The reading public knows what it likes. A book may violate all literary rules, be an abomination to literary critics, and still strike a chord with readers. After all, book reviewers are human and sometimes they are wrong—critics said L. Frank Baum’s Oz novels lacked imagination, yet millions of children have read his books, coming away with a newfound belief in their own abilities which have made them imaginative, self-confident contributors to society. The world is a better place because Baum wrote “The Wizard of Oz,” despite what his critics may have said. Even if a story is mindless entertainment of no literary or moral value, readers are willing to repay authors who entertain them—just think of the many authors who have repeat bestsellers in the marketplace today.

Those critics who know the rules, the ones Dr. Johnson warns us not to listen to, are the ones who bash books—they are the ones who will point out the typos and missing commas and give distorted reports of a book because they have an agenda, an inferiority complex, or are just niggardly people. One wonders why they bother to review books—if they do not enjoy books, they should not waste their or their readers’ time, nor should they complain about bad books when they could be praising the many deserving books that fail to get adequate attention. As my mother says, “If you have nothing nice to say, don’t say anything at all.”

The question then becomes, who is really qualified to review a book? It partly depends on the book itself, and an author should keep in mind who the reviewer is and his or her knowledge about the genre that author is writing. A sports columnist may review a book on healthcare, but his review should not be weighted as heavily as that of the medical book reviewer for the “New England Journal of Medicine.”

I believe I know a good book when I read it, but am I really qualified to review it? I like to think I fall into Dr. Johnson’s category of those who know the rules but are above them. With a Ph.D. in literature and years of professional writing experience, I clearly know the rules. That doesn’t mean I won’t start a sentence with “And” or “But” if I think it is effective. And I will celebrate an author who is experimental if it is clear the experimental author has studied his craft and is not someone who thinks everything he writes is inspired and not in need of revision. But while I know the rules and am above them, that does not make me qualified to review a book on computer software. I can, however, review a book on computer software written for the beginner so I can describe for potential readers my experience in reading the book and whether it helped me to learn about the topic, so my readers can determine if it will help them.

A good book reviewer can create a following of readers by recommending good books and being honest in his reviews. If he is dishonest, recommending books that are bad, or degrading books that are actually good for personal reasons such as disagreeing with an author’s political views, then readers will soon quit reading his reviews and he will be out of a job, and deservedly so.

One may also be a bad reviewer—I have read some atrociously written “professional” book reviews—and in this age of online bookstores when anyone can publish anything on the Internet, many readers have decided to play book reviewer by posting reviews on Amazon. Many of these Amazon reviewers know what they like; they are Dr. Johnson’s reviewers who rely on “natural taste and feelings,” and their opinions matter. Readers need to make sure, however, that they actually read these reviews rather than rely solely on the number of stars a book receives at Amazon.

If Dr. Johnson were alive today, I wonder what his response would be to Amazon and its review system. My guess is he would add a fourth reviewer to his list—he who does not know anything and has no right at all to review the book. Let me illustrate with a story of an experience I had this past week.

My local bookstore this week had autographed copies of Gregory Maguire’s new book, “A Lion Among Men.” I don’t really care for Maguire’s style or storylines, but “A Lion Among Men” is the third in his Oz series, and I am a fan of the Oz books—in fact, I collect first editions of the Oz novels, so I toyed with the idea of purchasing a copy of Maguire’s new novel. Before I decided, however, I went online to see what people on Amazon were saying about the book. That’s where I discovered the fourth kind of reviewer.

Note that “A Lion Among Men” was released on October 14, 2008. I saw the book in the store on October 16 and looked at the Amazon reviews that same day. I was surprised to find several reviews already posted on Amazon, some from advanced review copies no doubt. But one reviewer had posted a 5 star review several weeks before the book’s release, stating how much he enjoyed Maguire’s previous books and that he could not wait to read “A Lion Among Men.”

That is not a review!

My warning to authors is to ignore this fourth kind of critic—the one who reviews a book he knows nothing about. (Apparently Amazon agrees because it has since removed the review).

Unfortunately, the fourth type of critic isn’t limited to people who post on Amazon. Worse offenders are out there masquerading as “professional book reviewers.” These reviewers do not read the books they “review.” Not only do they write short 2-3 sentence reviews, based off of reading the back cover of a book with a sprinkle of flattering adjectives to make it look good, but they also tend to request multiple copies of a book from an author so they can resell the books. These people are not in the business of “reviewing” but of “reselling.” Authors who read reviews carefully will spot these fourth kinds of reviewers—they tend to make major mistakes when reviewing books they have not read. Unlike the Amazon reviewer mentioned above, however, they are not going to admit they have not read the book.

So, should a writer care what book reviewers say? Yes, if the reviewer enjoyed the book. Yes, if the reviewer was honest. Yes, if the reviewer did not enjoy the book and is honest about why without being the slave to a literary tradition or a stickler for grammar and punctuation.

A good reviewer is like a good teacher—he or she will inspire authors to be their best while giving them free reign to write their books in their own manner and style. And even then, if a good reviewer does not like the book and the reading public does, who cares what the critics think?

Contributor

Tyler TichelaarTyler R. Tichelaar is editor and contributing author of Authors Access: 30 Secrets for Authors and Publishers, the regionally bestselling Marquette Trilogy and the newly published Narrow Lives. He is the Associate Editor of Reader Views, he has interviewed over 200 authors, written more than 60 book reviews, and edited and evaluated manuscripts for publication

 

 

 

Read more articles for writers and publishers