Reviewers Reviewed

Gabe Chouinard lights a fire under the ass of reviewers.

I like to start the week off with a bang, so each Monday I will be posting a longer, more indepth piece that will examine varied issues and concerns. The intent is to kick-start a discussion around these concerns; to create an open dialogue with others. I hope you enjoy this meandering piece, and I hope it spurs some thought.

I’m not going to name names.

But according to the review blogs, it seems the publishers have been doing a good job of putting out nothing but readable, good books. In fact, reading the review blogs for any period of time, one might get the impression that SFF is filled with an inordinate amount of quality work, all of which equally demands the reader’s dollars. In fact, reading the review blogs for any amount of time, one may come away with the idea SFF absolutely teems with worthy books.

Which just isn’t the case.

There are a couple factors leading to this overall impression which I’d like to discuss.

And discuss he does. I’ve seen a couple of such musings in the blogosphere recently, and whether I agree or not (I do, in fact, for the most part), it’s certainly important to have these sorts of things out there. Wherever there is. Even with a publishing, or a reader hat on, I’ve seen some terrible reviews of books—not slagging off the books, simply badly written reviews, with little thought, or bringing an agenda to the table before hand. (This is fine, if we assume that the writer doesn’t claim to be any better than a fan reviewer.)

Plus there’s something that brings a smile to my author’s face to hear of reviewers being reviewed.

By Mark Newton

Born in 1981, live in the UK. I write about strange things.

One reply on “Reviewers Reviewed”

Comments are closed.