Quote:
Originally Posted by Rory Waterman
As for the formulaic advertising aspect: I'd never review, for any publication, a collection whose author I considered a friend. I wouldn't be subjective, and nor is anyone who does this. And when people send us (at New Walk) copies of books in the hope of a review and they recommend potential reviewers who are likely to 'understand' the collection, I feel as though I'm being implicated in a nasty-nice little culture of ineffective back-scratching. I don't trust the intentions behind most poetry book reviews - not as a reader. I would also never review a book by someone after they had reviewed mine - or at least I don't think I would. I don't yet have a book, so I can afford to make such a remark without having to worry about it! I don't say these things to criticise what others do - but I believe in what I say.
|
I'm just starting out reviewing books, and I like and agree with these guidelines. Thanks, Rory. I also shoot more for the essay rather than the review in the sense that I want to understand the book I'm reviewing and share that understanding with others (though they may disagree, of course). In the future, I don't see myself spending time reviewing books I strongly dislike or think badly written. There are reviewers out there who relish that kind of thing or just want to express a justly negative opinion (and that's their prerogative), but I'd rather put my energies toward more positive pursuits and celebrate the books I
do love by attempting to shed light on them and explain what I think makes them good. That may wind up making me a not-so-great reviewer in the end, possibly, but so be it.