I recently did a review of a book, an autobiographical of sorts, and I wrote a review based on my opinion of the book. Later I went to post my review on some of the other outlets (Amazon.com, Good Reads, Shelfari, & anobbi to mention a few). I didn’t post my review because I was in awe of all the negative reviews. Not negative of the book itself but of the author or celebrity in this case. Apparently, there is some bad blood between the author and his family. That’s common. Most celebrities have skeletons in their closets especially from family. My mind started to wonder though when writing a review do we need to know more of the history of the writer? At least in cases like this when it’s a so called autobiography? I wrote my review based solely on my opinion of the book not my opinion of the author’s personal life even though the book was based the telling of his life. Was this the right procedure? Should we research the authors we review before posting what we think of their books? Or should we review the work solely based on its merits? I was asked to read and review the book not make a judgment on the individuals life and whether what he said is true or not. I feel odd about it really but I have to remember what my Dad has always said about people. “There’s always three sides to every story. His, her’s, and the truth.” So with that knowledge I have to decide if my reviews are based on the entire story (i.e. history of the author, the making of the story, etc.) or do I solely make a judgment of the words I read. I think, no I know, in this case I made the right judgment. I read a book about a man I knew nothing about, laughed a bit, awed a bit, and I wrote a review about what I gained from the words on the pages.
The question remains, As book reviewers, what are our responsibilities to our readers about giving a review? Do we focus on the work at hand or do we need to research what lies behind a book?
**Before finishing this post, I read a Tweet from an author I follow. It was a link to another Book Reviewer's Blog and one very unhappy author's response. If you have time read through the comments. The terms "unprofessional" and "unhinged" come to mind.
3 comments:
I think if you're going to be reviewing an autobiography, review it based on the work itself. Because if you go into it having done tons of research it taints your opinion of the book itself.
That's how I pretty much felt about it. I was asked to review the book, not the person. I hope that's what I did.
I just review a book, based on the quality of the book's plot and characters. I don't really care about who the author is in real life, really.
Post a Comment