|
Post by Diane Merkel on Aug 12, 2007 16:58:29 GMT -6
I'm been thinking about starting a book review section on the main website and would like your opinions about it. I envision it as a place to which anyone can submit reviews of books -- reviews of the older books would be particularly desirable -- but am wondering if there should be a committee to review the reviews to ensure balance. Another possibility would be to publish no less than two reviews for a specific book in order to provide the balance. I admire everyone -- well, almost everyone -- who has authored a book because of the enormous work involved. My tendency is "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all" but I also appreciate the need for constructive criticism and, in some cases, "buyer beware" reviews.
Any thoughts? Any ideas? Any volunteers?
|
|
|
Post by Scout on Aug 13, 2007 6:25:51 GMT -6
Great idea Diane although I don't know about a committee...that sounds pretty serious. I have reviewed several Custer books on Alibris.com. They should be short and to the point and not long, perhaps limited to a paragraph or two. AND they should not attack another reviewer's review. No discussions...just reviews. No personal attacks on the authors either. Come to think of it I don't know if our little crowd could follow the rules though. Hey, I have an idea...how about a committee?
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Aug 13, 2007 10:13:51 GMT -6
Who was it that said an elephant is just a horse designed by a committee?
Gordie, I would volunteer to review, except that I never have a positive view of anything...heehaw........
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Aug 13, 2007 12:19:30 GMT -6
Diane--
I will be more than happy to help in any manner possible. Of course, I'd prefer to physically review fiction on my end (establishing myself as the female Father Heier)... and we can start with the classics, say, A Road We Do Not Know as well as others. You'd be surprised how many folks read Custerfiction--they just admit it quietly, under their breaths. And as I have said, time and time again, good fiction can propel one on to further research!
Trish
|
|
|
Post by bradandlaurie on Aug 13, 2007 13:05:49 GMT -6
This sounds like a marvelous idea! Now I am still a bit new to this topic but my wife is rapidly, and ardently, tutoring me on the Custers and the Little Bighorn. We also spent a small fortune on books at the conference and I am just wading through them now. We spent enough money that at one point at the conference Sandy Barnard proclaimed me his favorite person as I left his table in the dealer's room...
Please count me in if you're looking for volunteers.
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Aug 13, 2007 14:23:28 GMT -6
It sounds as if we may have a start. Scout, I agree with what you said about not reviewing the reviewer. Would it be OK to use the reviews you have already written? If so, please let me know which books you reviewed and I'll look for them at Alibris. Trish, you can be the Fiction Review Editor. Brad, you can be the Non-fiction Review Editor. (Glad to hear you contributed to Sandy's retirement fund! ) When I receive reviews, I'll pass them by the appropriate Review Editor. Those editors don't need to have read the book under review in order to determine if the review sounds fair; I basically just want a second opinion regarding its objectivity. While I was a newsletter editor, I had a review submitted that was a bit over the top in its criticism. After asking the reviewer to tone it down a bit, he did and admitted the review was better for it. Is the above OK with you three? Do we insist on real names for the reviewers or allow screen names?
|
|
|
Post by bradandlaurie on Aug 13, 2007 15:12:54 GMT -6
This is all fine with me.
I don't have a problem with using screen names. Of course if somebody takes issue with this it could be changed. Nothing has to be written in stone at this point.
Do count me in!
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Aug 13, 2007 18:06:43 GMT -6
I would be willing to submit reviews of books which I might have and actually read, especially of older items, whether generally available or not. Just let me know what sort of limits we are talking of, as to length.
Gordie, his beer was as warm as the look in her eyes. She sat on a stool................................................
|
|
|
Post by Scout on Aug 13, 2007 18:35:29 GMT -6
I think more than one review would be appropriate. Three or four. A variety is needed. Logical adult minded reviews. I read a lot of the reviews on Amazon and some reviewers attack the reviewer more than the book. Some really get personal. That would happen here particularly when people are posting anonymously. The nuts are out there.
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Aug 13, 2007 19:50:22 GMT -6
Diane--
What's cool with you is cool with me ... I don't know why I'm being so easy to get along with these days ...! One thing that we've done in our writers' group is that we try to balance sexes on the committees we do chair--as often men and women have very different reactions to a given piece of writing. As I'm sure we'll be starting slow, that may not yet be essential, but it might be something to look at long-range.
Trish (who doesn't mind using her real name) ... aka., the Female Father Heier ...
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Aug 13, 2007 22:56:30 GMT -6
Good -- this is coming along nicely. We will allow screen names unless it somehow becomes a problem. Gordie, I would love reviews of the older stuff. As you know, people often ask about the old books and whether they are worth the prices now asked. The reviews don't need to be long, anywhere from fifty to a few hundred words at the most. Scout, believe me, I know the nuts are out there. We'll have each review pass by Trish (fiction) and Brad (non-fiction) to make sure no one goes off the deep end. The reviews will be on web pages, not on the boards or on the wiki, so I will have to post them myself. More than one review per book will be welcome. Trish, you are welcome to have a male assist you. I can see that would be especially helpful in the fiction department. BTW, if there are salty scenes (such as you apparently are writing ) you might want to make sure that is noted, both for those who want to avoid them and for those who want to indulge! Brad will have most of the reviews pass by him. Scout has offered to assist, so please take advantage of him, Brad! Thanks, all!
|
|
|
Post by bradandlaurie on Aug 14, 2007 4:00:12 GMT -6
Just let me know where I can pull the reviews and I'll be happy to look them over. I have been spending quite a bit of time looking over the message board and, yes, there are some colorful opinions out there.
|
|
|
Post by George Armstrong Custer on Aug 14, 2007 15:44:59 GMT -6
For what it's worth, Diane, I think your basic idea for a book review section is an excellent one. Particularly laudable is your desire to include reviews of some of the older literature - much of which has become established as classics of the genre - and for which updated reviews made with the benefit of subsequent scholarship would serve as a useful guide. And initial impressions in the form of reviews of new additions to the canon would, of course, be useful to novice and 'buff' alike.
Where I see problems arising is the notion that reviewers should automatically be subject to 'editors' on the basis that these editors 'don't need to have read the book under review in order to determine if the review sounds fair.' How on earth can someone determine whether a review is fair or not if they haven't read the subject of the review? A review may comprehensively praise or condemn a book - but whether a polemical review is justified or not can surely only be judged by reading the book in question and bearing the review in mind. Over and above this are the questions of whether a book is well researched or well written - which are two entirely seperate concepts. Determining whether a book is well researched and factually accurate (as oposed to merely opinionated) can usually be decided with a greater degree of objectivity. On the other hand, whether a book is well written or not is a pretty subjective question, and in the absence of errors of fact you will always have differing opinions from the readership as to whether a book is well written or not. I can think of few things more likely to cause unnecessary friction than for someone to put forward an honest and considered review only to have it edited or deleted by someone who has never picked up a copy of the book being reviewed!
Bearing the above in mind, I would suggest that all that ought to be required by way of editing book reviews is a check for slanderous allegations against the author, or anything which breaches the forum's existing codes of practice on decency of language. Other than that, give the reviewer free reign to give their honest reactions to a book - a polemic in favor of a book would surely be balanced by that from a second or third reviewer with a different reaction to the same work. Those who haven't read the book can then usefully draw their own conclusions from both points of view. The fact that, as I understand it, there will be no mechanism for posts attacking reviewers to be made ought to allow the freedom of expression for the reviewers themselves to work to everyone's benefit.
ciao, GAC
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Aug 14, 2007 16:22:06 GMT -6
I agree with you completely, GAC, except for the part where you think an editor has to have read the book in question. What I meant is that the editors (perhaps a different title would be better) would look at the review to make sure it isn't attacking someone on a personal level and that it covers many of the points you make. I don't want or expect them to change the review, except perhaps grammatical mistakes, and/or to insert their own opinions.
Basically, I'm looking for another set of eyes to read the review to determine if it should be posted. I'm simply trying to find a way to avoid my being the sole judge and jury, and I am grateful for any help I can get.
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Aug 14, 2007 16:22:11 GMT -6
Diane:
So have we decided on a mechanism for actually getting the reviews to whoever is to do the vetting, or is that still being worked out? So long as it's not any more difficult than posting or Emailing, I shouldn't have a problem, but if it involves anything other than a basic exposure to computer operations, I'll likely wind up sending mine to someone in Greece..................
Gordie, not a complete idiot - some parts are missing.....................................................
|
|