Break through the Book Review Writing Block

Break through the Book Review-Writing Block

I have a store of historical mysteries of all types: new and old, read and unread, hardcover and soft, historical mysteries and contemporary mysteries rooted in the past.

You can pick one or more, and when you are done it's yours to keep. The only requirement is that you MUST review it within 60 days. If you don't like it, that's okay--negative reviews are fine, as discussed the book review guidelines. If you hate it to the point that you can't read it, however, please return it to me so that I can give someone else a shot at it.

If after you've read and reviewed it you decide for whatever reason that you don't want to keep it, I'd appreciate it if you would consider returning it to me so that I can pass it on to someone else for another point of view. Otherwise, please consider donating the book to your local Friends of the Library.

When I was publishing Most Loving Mere Folly I ran a survey which was arguably the single most exciting thing I ever did, judging from the extraordinarily high response rate it drew. From that survey I learned that the average member read about 15 books a month and 4 magazines a week (!!). So, you'd think that my postal carrier would have been staggering under the weight of the book reviews that my members were dying to write, if only to see their name in print.

But noooooooooo.

You Say I Say
"I wouldn't know what to say." "Say what you would say to your mother/sister/friend/co-worker."

"I can't write." "You just did. Put your thoughts on paper. If they're a little muddled, that's what my job as editor is about."

"I wanted to review XYZ but someone else already did it." "So which one should leave, Siskel or Ebert? Yes, Virginia, there is more than one way to opine on a book."

"I didn't know if ABC would be appropriate." "Given the broad editorial scope of the journal, it probably is. I look for excuses to be inclusive. If it's thoroughly impossible, I'll let you know, but thank you prettily."

"I don't have a computer." "So type it."

"I don't have a typewriter." "So hand print it. (You may write in script only if your handwriting is very, very good, and only if you print proper nouns in block letters.)"

"I don't have time." "Sure you do, if you want to."

"I was going to but I got busy and now I don't remember it well enough to write about it." "Use post-its and scribble little comments to yourself, sticking them on the relevant pages. You can go back later and do the review."

So, what am I looking for in a review, anyway? For starters, I don't care much about length. There's room and reason for everything from pithy capsule reviews to lengthy comparative analyses. Having said that, I should add that I don't think it's really possible to say anything substantive in under 150 words.

Let's talk about your basic review. It starts off, not unreasonably, with the name of the book and its author, and its copyright year. If it's a newer book, you should include the name of the publisher; if it's a newer paperback reprint, you should include the name of that publisher and (if known) the hardcover publisher. If it's one of those books that's been around a zillion years in a zillion different guises, don't bother. If it's out of print, say so. And, in deference to the small publishers, if it wasn't put out by one of the majors, please include an address or telephone number for the publisher--they almost always appear in these types of books.

Next comes the plot synopsis. A general idea of the major characters, setting and major story lines are in order. If you're feeling reckless, you can discuss themes. What you don't ever want to do is to give away a major plot development, or to tell so much of the story that it ruins the potential reading experience for others. There is no "Spoiler Alert" space in the printed media. :-) (There are also no emoticons.) If you get carried away I will pick up my trusty blue pencil and save you from yourself.

Now comes the fun part, wherein you get to ruminate on what worked for you, what didn't, and why. Be specific. Quote passages that illustrate what you are talking about, or cite specific instances. Let me give you an example from a review I just wrote last night:

"The real reason that this novel is the least successful of her historical novels is that the extreme partisanship becomes suspect. Gone is any inkling of Hotspur's personal ambitions, replaced by the loving, selfless mentorship of young Hal that molded him, one is to assume, into the good strong king he will eventually become. I would have trusted the book more if there had been even an iota of a flaw to indicate fairness.

"Still, I can't help but wonder what she would have made of Richard III."

The book, by the way, is A Bloody Field by Shrewsbury, by Edith Pargeter.

It is not necessary to say "I really liked this book" or "I recommend this book" or "I didn't like it at all". Your feeling about the book should be apparent from your analysis. There are very few flawless books. Some feature terrific characters in so-so plots. Some have interesting plots but smell too strongly of the oil lamp. Some are beautifully written and others merely competent. Some have settings that look, smell and sound real, but are peopled by cardboard characters. Since we will be reading and reviewing historical mysteries and fiction, there will be a whole added area to discuss. Do the historical elements ring true? Is the use of language appropriate to the period? Does the author bring any particular insight into some arcane subject?

This is not to say that you must address all of these elements in any given review. You may choose to focus on one, and briefly comment on another one or two. This is not a checklist, but a general offering of ideas. As you read a book it will usually become apparent which elements you will want to key in on, and sooner more often than later. Contrarily, of course, it wasn't until the very last chapter of A Bloody Field that I realized what direction my review would take, because it wasn't until that point that I realized why I was so troubled by it. Sometimes you will start off writing about one aspect and find yourself making a left turn.

I will say this. Reviewing books routinely will make you read them differently. Reviewing books routinely becomes more enjoyable as you get the hang of it. And reviewing books routinely for HMAS won't make you any money, but it will save you some.

By the way, for the occasional reviewer I will deduct $1 for each review off of the cost of the next year's membership (you have to keep track and include a note with your renewal fee). And for people who regularly contribute material, your membership will be free.

Submit an Article

HMAS Home ||| About ||| Contribute ||| HMAS Reading Group ||| Links