Faint Praise: The Plight of Book Reviewing in America

by Gail Pool

  For more than two hundred years, book reviewers have influenced American readers, setting our literary agenda by helping us determine not only what we read but also what we think about what we read. And for nearly as long, critics of these critics have lambasted book reviews for their overpraise, hostility, banality, and bias.             Faint Praise takes a hard and long-overdue look at the institution of book reviewing. Gail Pool, herself an accomplished reviewer and review editor, analyzes the inner workings of this troubled trade to show how it works—and why it so often fails to work well. She reveals why bad reviewing happens despite good intentions and how it is that so many intelligent people who love books can say so many unintelligent things on their behalf.             Reviewers have the power to award prestige to authors, give prominence to topics, and shape opinion and taste; yet most readers have little knowledge of why certain books are selected for review, why certain reviewers are selected to review them, and why they so often praise books that aren’t all that good. Pool takes readers behind the scenes to describe how editors choose books for review and assign them to reviewers, and she examines the additional roles played by publishers, authors, and readers. In describing the context of reviewing, she reveals a culture with little interest in literature, much antipathy to criticism, and a decided weakness for praise. In dissecting the language of reviews, Pool demonstrates how it often boils down to unbelievable hype. Pool explores the multifaceted world of book reviewing today, contrasting traditional methods of reviewing with alternative book coverage, from Amazon.com to Oprah, and suggesting how the more established practices could be revised. She also explores the divide between service journalism practiced by reviewers versus the alleged high art served up by literary critics—and what this fuzzy boundary between reviewing and criticism really means. This is the first book to analyze the field in depth, weighing the inherent difficulties of reviewing against the unacceptable practices that undermine the very reasons we read—and need—reviews. Faint Praise is a book not just for those who create and review books but also for everyone who loves books. By demystifying this hidden process, Pool helps everyone understand how to read reviews—and better decide what to read.

Genres: Nonfiction, Writing, Books About Books

170 pages, Hardcover

First published May 1, 2007

Reviews

[Lobstergirl · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very clear, well-written critique of the state of book reviewing in America. (Since it was published in 2007, its gloomy assessments are rendered even more tragic by the further declines in professional book reviewing, as freestanding book sections have folded in many major newspapers.) Pool's goal at the outset is to "understand why bad reviewing happens despite good intentions and how so many intelligent people who love books can say so many unintelligent things in their behalf." A freelance reviewer and former journal editor, she addresses nuts and bolts issues such as the paltry fees reviewers earn and the difficulty outside of New York city even getting review copies from publishers. She discusses the problems in many reviews: reviewers who fail to distinguish an author's statements from their own; reviews that are entirely plot summary, or give away major spoilers, or are filled with cliches and hyperbole; reviews that fail to actually assess and evaluate the book. She laments that mainstream publishers are given so much space (relatively speaking, of course), so that possible hidden gems from obscure authors and publishers go unreviewed, and wonders why reviewers who know little or nothing about a topic are assigned to review books on it. She names names (or, at least, her ample endnotes direct you to the proper names) and slaps around the New York Times Book Review, and who can be against that? If you've ever found yourself annoyed by "sweet, bland commendations fall[ing] everywhere" (Elizabeth Hardwick, 1959) or reviews' "engulfing and meaningless amiability" (Helen E. Haines, 1934), if you wish you had a dollar for every skincrawling "luminous" or "deft" in a review, this book is for you.

140 pp. of text, 8 pp. of endnotes, 14 pp. bibliography.

[Annegida · Rating 3 out of 5]

where is the proof, ma'am

[Helena · Rating 3 out of 5]

ironien med å skrive ei omtale (som, som er vanleg for mine goodreads-omtalar, ikkje kjem til å vere relevant til verken boka eller veldig nøye kva kva eg synest om boka). jamnt over så visste eg mange av desse tinga frå før av, men eg treng sekundærkjelder for å skrive eit summative essay om effekten sosiale media har på bokomtalar

[Bucket · Rating 2 out of 5]

Pool describes the history of American book reviewing, beginning at the end of the 18th century, and the accompanying history of authors and critics alike attacking book reviewing and reviewers for being alternatively too negative, mean, and nitpicking, or too positive, empty, and lacking a critical edge.

She goes on to explain the current problems with book reviews, how a lack of respect for book reviewing as a profession and form of writing contributes to the problem, and, finally, to offer a solution where editors take responsibility for thoughtfully choosing books to review, assigning them to the right reviewers, and editing the resulting reviews for quality.

While freely admitting that the field of book reviewing has always been seen as in decline, Pool argues here that we are again in a time when book reviews are declining in quality.

They are, she argues, too positive and full of over-praise (i.e. this book will change the way that novels are written) and 'reviewese' (a first novel is impressive, new novels by well-known authors are towering achievements) that is virtually meaningless. Due to space constraints in publications and just plain poor writing, reviews often are missing one or the other of their two necessary pieces: a brief description that gets to the point of what the book is really about, and some sort of evaluation about the book's quality.

While I agree with her that a lot of book reviews out there are less than stellar, I'd argue that a lot of published writing in general is less than stellar, as a result of the need for speed and the democratization of media (anyone and their uncle can publish anything these days).

Pool's solution struck me as a little bit silly. After all, if editors had time and resources to be more thoughtful about how they run their book reviewing pages, they would do so. Trying to change editors and improve the quality of reviews won't likely change the fact that Americans don't read anymore and don't have a need for high-quality book reviews. Niche publications for folks who do still appreciate book reviews (The Millions, The Atlantic Monthly, etc) offer high-quality writing and effective, critical book reviews.

Pool's argument aside, I found this book to be extremely repetitive, which surprised me since it's so short. Perhaps a long-form essay would have sufficed?

Themes: book reviewing, criticism, history, journalism, reviewing as a profession

[Lorraine · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was very informative about the book reviewing industry; it was also meticulously researched. I really appreciated the quotes from book reviews of yore and the look at the history of book reviewing. I think Pool offers some very good advice for people who are looking to get into book reviewing. She is also fair in her critique of the industry, admitting that she is guilty of many of the sins she highlights.

Unfortunately, the book is not a rolicking read. It's informative and the topic is interesting, but Pool's writing is pretty dry. The parts where she quotes from what other people have said about the practice of reviewing (usually pretty negative and cutting commentary) and the parts where she quotes actual reviews and the parts where she tells stories about things that happened to her or the one time this guy sued the paper because the review of his book was full of factual errors--those parts were engaging. The rest of it not so much.

Also unfortunately, the book is dated. It's ten years old and barely touches on the way the internet has changed book reviewing. Goodreads isn't even mentioned. I would be very interested to see what Pool has to say about the way the industry has changed in the last decade as well as what she thinks about the current status of self-published books.

[Anne · Rating 3 out of 5]

Before 2007, I never really read book reviews. Ironically, given the fact that I even write this blog, there was always a part of me that didn't quite trust them. I felt like sometimes they gave away too much of the plot - or I wondered how the reviewer was really chosen. Did she really have the proper background to review a book on a given subject? What if he was an aspiring novelist himself and had a grudge against the successful one he was reviewing? Well, this book addresses all those issues and more - while exploring the demise of book reviewing in American journalism. Pool questions the general premise - that there has in fact been a downturn in the quality and quantity of book reviews in American media, looking back and finding that similar allegations have been made since the 18th century (and perhaps earlier). Pool then examines why this is in fact taking place, most notably: poor pay for reviewers, poor organization on the part of publishing houses in getting books to the reviewers, and poor matching of reviewers to books.I was particularly interested in Pool's assessment of how book reviewers shape readers' choices and have a hand in shifting the tide of a given novel's popularity. While there will always be certain authors whose books get reviewed no matter what (Richard Russo who I'm currently reading comes to mind), of the over 150,000 books that are published in the United States this year, a very small percentage are reviewed in "mainstream" media. Books are obviously chosen on criteria other than the actual quality of the book - it would be impossible for an editor to read every single book published and then make a determination of what deserved to be reviewed. Thus, one has to wonder (and Pool does), what books are being discarded merely because of the sheer volume of literature being published - and what books are being reviewed for reasons other than merit (merit in terms of good writing, as well as merit in terms of importance to society - even if worthy of a poor review). With respect to reviews, Pool also touches upon the phenomenon of the "amateur" reviewer - the countless number of people with book blogs, and the people who review products on sites such as Amazon and of course, goodreads - and what impact this has had on the professional review community. As a professional reviewer, I think it is to Pool's credit, that she is inclusive of the amateur reviewer, not as a replacement by any means of the professionals, but as an adjunct, and a means for increasing readership (of books and of reviews) in general. Over the past year, I have become an avid reader of book reviews. I am usually so impressed by how well-read (or seemingly well-read) the authors of these reviews are, how much research has gone into their reviews, and how the opinion of a person I don't even know really does influence whether I'll choose to pick up or pass on a book I see in the store. It's a very powerful tool. But, as Pool points out, it is ripe for abuse, and there are many ways to improve the way reviews are done - ways that would benefit authors and publishing houses, as well as the reviewers and the publications they serve.

[Iona Stewart · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a well-written overview of the field of reviewing in the USA.

We are advised as to the problems of reviewers being obliged to review books in which they have no interest, in which they can find no redeeming features whatsoever, but on which they nevertheless feel pressured to come up with a positive judgement, and all for an extremely meagre pay.

We amateur reviewers on Amazon and other such sites are criticized, I admit with due reason, among other things, for our poor grammar and one-word reviews. According to Pool, many of our reviews are "ignorant and abominably written". This is very true, unfortunately.

We review gladly for no remuneration whatsoever apart from the pure joy of expressing our humble opinions. (I for one experience great satisfaction in being able to write exactly what I think, feel and want and being permitted to be totally subjective.)

However, it turns out that many authors review their own works on Amazon, promote the books of friends and "attack more prominent authors they" think "overrated", protected by their election of anonymity.

There's a chapter on the mismatching of reviewer and the book to be reviewed, i.e. the constant failure of editors to assign books to the right reviewers.

The author refers to George Orwell's assertion that reviewers will need to lower their standards. otherwise they will find themselves reiterating in all their reviews "This book is tripe". Editors want enthusiasm, and Pool states that "enthusiasm for the field is crucial to all reviewing". But we need the "enthusiasm of engagement, not of cheer-leading". Oprah, for instance, is "a book cheerleader", and this is what her fans have enjoyed.

One chapter discusses whether book reviews are necessary, while another deals with improving the trade.

I am no expert on book reviewing (there, I admitted it), but found this book to be articulate (if a book in itself can be so) and intensely readable. It illuminates the whole field of book reviewing from an insider's point of view. If I knew more about the field, I might have been able to be more critical, but as it is, I absolutely recommend this book to anyone interested in books and book reviewing.

[Mirte · Rating 3 out of 5]

So I virtually read this book in one day, which is never a good idea for theoretical stuff. Anyway, the writing was very understandable and not at all dull (with an exception of the first chapter), making it easier to keep reading. Pool keeps far from jargon, explaining in everyday English how the bookreviewing culture in America works. Chapter by chapter, she elaborates on a certain aspect of it, pointing out good and bad practises as we continue. She does not fail to include the influence of the internet on book reviewing, but also pays attention to the ways books are selected and the ethics of reviewers. Eventually, in her last chapter, she manages to tie all the chapters and the criticism she has given there on literary reviews into a conclusion, i.e. a practical proposal of how book reviewing can be improved to cater for its public in a better way ánd to provide a better status quo for reviewers to work in. The text was at times a bit too long, as some points were repeated every chapter, and by reading the book in one day I have probably not understood all of its facets. Yet this is a good start to find out something more about the American culture of book reviewing, as it actually differs on some points with the Dutch/European way of reviewing literature.

[Dragana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Criticism won't bother many, but if your answer to "Is reading dying out?" is Yes, take a look at this.
http://www.amazon.com/Faint-Praise-Pl...

[GraceAnne · Rating 3 out of 5]

A thoughtful, wry, and sensible discussion of book reviewing, what it means, and what it does.
Anyone interested in the subject - librarians, editors, and probably everyone on GoodReads - would find value here, and things to think about.

[Louise Leetch · Rating 4 out of 5]

A handy dandy handbook for those who write as well as read reviews.