- A book review should supply a judgment. A critic must draw on evidence and provide analysis to back up an evaluation. Having an opinion – thumbs up or down — is just the beginning. Keep in mind that most reviews will be mixed – few volumes are all good or all bad.
- A book reviewer must be disinterested – there should be no conflicts of interest between critic and author. If there are connections, readers should be informed, so they can evaluate the reviewer’s credibility.
- A book reviewer must not sound like a publicist. The language of criticism is not the balderdash of marketing. A reviewer’s evaluation should generate interest in a book by sparking ideas and dialogue. Reviewers are not salespeople. They support books because they treat them seriously, as more than consumer products.
- A book review must contain quotations from the volume under discussion, both to provide evidence for the argument and to support the critic’s authority. If you insist that a quotation makes a particular point or is of high or poor quality, the example had better be a slam dunk. If not, you will lose the reader’s trust.
- A book review is an exercise in rhetoric – you want to persuade the reader of your point of view. That means drawing on logic and expressing passion. Also, feel free to sling all the arrows in language’s quiver – humor, irony, lyricism. A good tip for being an effective book critic: read poetry; it will expand your linguistic horizons.
- A book reviewer must be fair. Go out of your way to understand the author’s intent and make that clear in your critique. Anticipate counterarguments to the ones you are making – answering them in your piece will only make your notice stronger, more convincing.
- High-flying adjectives do not do the work of analysis. What is the best way for a critic to argue that a book is accomplishing something good or bad, or hovering somewhere in the middle? By describing how authors go about doing what they do, mapping the various nuts and bolts, explaining why the book under discussion made you feel the way it did. That is how a reviewer articulates value. And, if you do it right, others will be persuaded, or they will at least entertain your point of view.
- A book critic should have an independent sensibility that is conveyed through an individual style. It takes time and practice, but a reader should be able to sense a reviewer’s personality in his prose.
- A book critic does not only review volumes they like. H. L. Mencken argued, rightly, that worthwhile arts criticism clears away the parasitic weeds so healthy plants can thrive. A serious critic is not a consumer guide who anoints the good – they are critical thinkers who help guide the culture by exercising their powers of discrimination, offering alternative perspectives.
- A book critic should know something about the subject/author that is under review – educate yourself so you feel comfortable making a confident-sounding verdict. Young critics will need to “brazen” it out. They should do as much research as they can and then render their best judgment.
- A book review should be clearly structured – but as an argument, not as a description or summary of a book’s content supplemented by effusions of praise or dispraise. Also, once reviewers have mastered the basic structure of a critique, they should feel free to experiment. The form is amazingly flexible — just make sure to include judgment, evidence, and analysis.
- A book reviewer should be interested in the craft of criticism. Read other reviews and follow other critics. Don’t be afraid of borrowing strategies and techniques from other practitioners. And be proud of what you are doing – book reviewing has attracted some of the finest writers from around the world.
— Bill Marx
