« Poverty and discrimination | Main | Is the minimum wage coercive? »
What's the optimal number of book reviews?
Virginia Postrel writes:
As an author, I want more book reviews; quantity matters more than quality when you're going for sheer exposure. But as a reader, I only want more interesting reviews, particularly of books I'm not likely to learn about otherwise.
Newspaper book reviews, of course, are declining in number. Here is New York Times coverage of the phenomenon.
I can think of three functions for book reviews:
1. They help people learn about good books. If this is true, we should expect a market optimum.
2. No one much uses book reviews, but they make newspapers feel like more prestigious products. In this case book reviews would be an inefficient form of product differentiation by making The New York Times appear more different from The New York Post than readers ideally would like. There would be too many book reviews.
3. People use book reviews as a substitute for reading the books themselves. I call this "book reviews as signaling." Abolish the reviews and either a) people will have to go read the books (an even more wasteful form of signalling), or b) people will forget about literary matters altogether, which lowers signalling costs.
I use book reviews as I would use ads for books and blurbs for books. I just want the bottom line. I would be happier if newspapers published many more one-paragraph book reviews, but with very clear and definite evaluations. Entertainment Weekly does just this, although I find their taste in books unreliable. Nonetheless I am not alone in my preference, and I believe that few people read long book reviews. That makes me think there is something to #2.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on May 7, 2007 at 07:03 AM in Books | Permalink
Comments
I see long book reviews as signaling reviewer quality: in order to write a longer, coherent review, one must actually read the book. I give more weight to a long review (even one I do not read) than to a blurb (assuming similar repulations of reviewers).
Don't forget, too, that reviews can be read for entertainment, sort of like gossiping about movies. (I often read movie reviews after seeing a movie, but rarely before.) To the extent that one prefers short, pointed reviews, does Amazon's system suffice? The system has a builit in reputational mechanism and even requires a "bottom line" assessment in terms of stars!
Posted by: blink at May 7, 2007 7:51:26 AM
I would be happier if newspapers published many more one-paragraph book reviews, but with very clear and definite evaluations.
This is precisely what Foreign Affairs does in their book reviews section, and is the main reason why I read this journal.
Posted by: Pablo Stafforini at May 7, 2007 7:55:31 AM
One function of a book review that sort of combines 1 and 3 is to warn you against investing time and money in a bad book. If a book comes with a reputation attached to because of the author's past work or prepublication hype, a review that shows why that prepublication reputation was undeserved serves a really valuable function for the reader (but not the author or publisher).
Posted by: RWB at May 7, 2007 8:05:00 AM
I just want the bottom line.
That is mostly the approach I take to reviewing books. I started a blog to review every book I read. The first line is the bottom line: buy it, read it, skip it, or burn it. (A book only gets "buy it" if I recommend reading it more than once. Why have a bookshelf full of things you are never going to look at?) The second paragraph is the book summary.
And then I go on for a long time. I do not just want the bottom line, but I want to be able to get that instantly and walk away, if I so choose.
Tyler's reviews here on MR have the benefit of brevity, but perhaps too much so. There are longer descriptions of why we should check out a particular web site than read a 600 page book. The recommendations are also undercut by Tyler's explanation that he skips much of the text while he reads. A very strong recommendation included something along the lines of "I read fully a quarter of it!" I read closely and for retention, so our different approaches may lead to different recommendations (and fewer of them on my part).
Posted by: Zubon at May 7, 2007 8:15:31 AM
Sometimes the review is itself newsworthy. For example, there was last Friday's review of Tenet's book by Douglas Feith (available at Opinionjournal.com). As such, should this be an additional reason to see a review?
Posted by: Paul McMahon at May 7, 2007 8:37:06 AM
I didn't actually have time to read this post, but someone was kind enough to review it for me. My interest was piqued enough that if I have time this afternoon I'll read the whole thing.
Posted by: John Goes at May 7, 2007 8:46:43 AM
The problem with book reviews is that the reviewer doesn't have much incentive to read the book. Payment is typically very low and monitoring costs fairly high (the whole point of getting someone to write the review is so you don't have to yourself).
When payment for copy is on a per word basis, more, shorter, book reviews will certainly mean poor quality.
Posted by: thom at May 7, 2007 8:48:12 AM
Regarding book reviews in philosophy journals: More books are published than I have time to read. I use reviews in part to help me know which books I should read. But, also, they are helpful for letting me know what the state of play is in fields other than mine. So, while I'm an ethicist, I can use the reviews to keep current with epistemology without devoting excessive time. Finally, even in my own subfields, I can't read everything, so book reviews are helpful there, too.
Posted by: J. at May 7, 2007 9:09:25 AM
Books are just one of the competitors for my time. If I see a good review in the NYTimes, Wpost, NYReview or in a blog, fine. I'll get it from the library and try it. But if I don't see reviews, I may spend more time surfing blogs, or gardening, or whatever.
Posted by: Bill Harshaw at May 7, 2007 9:16:42 AM
I used to skim book reviews to accomplish Tyler's #1. But I gradually stopped doing that as I came to rely more and more on blogs (such as MR) for learning about new books. (And, to a much lesser degree, I learn about new books by skimming the shelves at Borders.)
Once I've learned of a book's existence, I mainly use Amazon reviews and the "look inside" feature (when available) to make my final put-in-queue/don't-put-in-queue decision. Amazon reviews usually reveal whether they can be relied upon.
For technical works in my field, I generally make the final decision without using reviews at all. I go by the book's stated subject, the author's qualifications, and the publisher's reputation.
Posted by: jp at May 7, 2007 9:47:14 AM
Films, albums and restaurants are generally reviewed and previewed with a star or grade rating, but the same is not true of books, plays, art exhibits, and live music. I find this frustrating, and my suspicion is that there is a tight and cosy relationship between the producers, promoters and reviewers of plays and the like, but I can't see why most book reviews should not use a simple rating.
The folks at The Complete Review, who collate and grade other reviews, are a welcome exception here.
Posted by: jonm at May 7, 2007 10:12:41 AM
Newspaper book reviews, of course, are declining in number.
It's actually a more precipitous decline than this statement indicates, as the National Book Critics Circle Blog Campaign to Save Book Reviews chronicles. I wrote about the issue here and, in a follow-up, here.
The optimal length for a book review is not a new topic, as Kate's Book Blog reminds us by quoting Orwell on the subject.
I just want the bottom line. I would be happier if newspapers published many more one-paragraph book reviews, but with very clear and definite evaluations. Entertainment Weekly does just this, although I find their taste in books unreliable.
This is a valid point were it not so difficult to determine the merit of a book. Because it is, we tend to like to see how a book reviewer arrived at their conclusion, requiring the reasoning behind why they liked or disliked a book. Otherwise they could be using different evaluation criteria than the reader would, or they might irrationally dislike the book, or be using an unfair metric, or something similar. Updike wrote: "1. Try to understand what the author wished to do, and do not blame him for not achieving what he did not attempt." With longer reviews, it's often possible to separate the sins of the reviewer from the sins of the author.
The only way you can get the point where you trust someone's up or down vote is to have sufficient past information about their tastes, which, in an impersonal context, can only be gained by reading something like their full book reviews. We're going in a circle, of course, and I think there's a reason why book reviews continue to exist as they do: the problems with just giving books an up/down or single paragraph outweigh the benefits because of the problems inherent in judgment.
Finally, book reviews have an additional function not listed above: they act as the first draft of literary criticism. Books that resonate through time often have scholars who go back and examine the first reactions to an important book, and those initial reviews can kick off academic and cultural criticism. This would also seem to cause more book reviews to be written than is optimal for a reader like Tyler, but different people have different needs. Future scholars probably wish more (and more knowledgeable) reviews were written.
Posted by: Jake at May 7, 2007 10:58:58 AM
Book reviews, like newspapers, simply do not have the same relevance they once did. With the instant information provided by the internet we are able to access reviews that more succinctly align with our specific interests. Using Amazon.com as an example, I can read reviews by people who tastes closely align with my own. As well, with Amazon suggestions I am often informed of books I will like without the trouble of having to research and find news books on my own.
Posted by: Sean at May 7, 2007 11:23:14 AM
When I see multiple reviews of the same book in various outlets, it lets me know that a book is important. Important books contain information that an informed person should be familiar with, so if the topic is not of interest to me I use a long review as a substitute for reading the book. If the topic interests me than I read the book and skip most of the reviews.
Posted by: sourcreamus at May 7, 2007 11:51:25 AM
I read book reviews in part because I don't have time to read all the books. I don't see how that involves "signaling" -- who would I be signalling?
Posted by: Robert Book at May 7, 2007 1:00:53 PM
Robert Book,
Perhaps Tyler means something else, but reading the review as a substitute for reading the book allows you to talk about the book without having read it. You look like someone who reads a lot, but you are using a shorter-than-Cliff's Notes version. This gives you enough to look good at a cocktail party or in a blog comment.
The best reviews for that are negative and snarky. You signal yourself as a learned person who has read the book, and also one who has thought about it enough to dismiss the author's years of work with a few incisive comments. Ideally, your listeners will acknowledge your superior mind and turn to another topic before you turn your withering scorn on them for having brought up such a silly little tome.
You will occasionally see someone cribbing from a review get confronted with the fact that he has never read the book/seen the movie/etc. and has no idea what he is talking about. Doesn't Good Will Hunting have a scene like that, where a college student is passing some author's ruminations on history as his own? I must admit, I still have yet to see the film, so I may have no idea what I am talking about.
Posted by: Zubon at May 7, 2007 5:40:51 PM
Reading reviews as substitutes for reading books is not a scam, but a time-saver. I always note that I've only read the reviews if that is the case when I discuss it with someone. It's not like there's something to prove.
Posted by: srp at May 7, 2007 7:32:22 PM
Hmm. I get a number of books to review for slashdot (about 5 books twice per year). Though very few reviews get published. Do you think that a similar filtering mechanism might be going on? Where the reviews are being made, but some editorial decisions are being made to cut them? Where some editor is going: *rip* Too Long! *rip* Too Short! *rip* Too Beige!
Posted by: Peter at May 7, 2007 9:37:43 PM
When I get to the book reviews in Reason then I toss it in the trash and go to bed.
Posted by: Paul N at May 7, 2007 10:02:05 PM
I use book reviews to substitute for reading the actual books. Book authors get paid to stretch out an argument so long that someone's willing to pay $20 or more for it. Reviewers get paid to condense the $20 argument for the 50 cents it costs to buy a newspaper. I favor efficiency!
Posted by: Kevin B. O'Reilly at May 7, 2007 10:38:09 PM
srp: Then you are not using the reviews to signal. Kevin B. O'Reilly expresses much the same view. Instead of getting the bottom line about the book, you want the bottom line from the book. This seems like a viable strategy for much non-fiction.
Posted by: Zubon at May 8, 2007 8:20:17 AM
These remarks suggesting that Readers Digest had the right idea should be preserved as evidence of a dying, or, more optimistically, cyclically ebbing civilisation. What would be a suitable summary of Mimesis? OfHistory and Geography of Human Genes? Of The Arms of Krupp? Would bologna be a suitable substitute for steak because it's easier to chew? Isn't the simple metric of asking whether the author is good and whether the text was rushed usually enough?
Posted by: lw at May 8, 2007 11:42:32 AM
"I see long book reviews as signaling reviewer quality:"
I had just posted a long book review on my blog when I read this comment. Gee, thanks!
Posted by: knackeredhack at May 8, 2007 4:27:33 PM
i do like book reviews very much. the most important thing is who wrote it. so, first of all, it would be nice to know something about hte author of review and then you decide if its is a big crap or not really.
and me, by myself, happy to admit that few of these reviews introduced me to some wonderful books ive ever read.
and unfortunatelly, im not sure if i would ever notice them without reading these reviews in advance.
Posted by: Marianna at May 9, 2007 10:13:26 AM
Three.
What irks the most is when big-name authors get mountains of reviews in every publication there is - as though Stephen King aficionados might not know he's got a new book coming - or we get sucked into Pessl "let's all review the attractive author" - when really, a few reviews would suffice and perhaps leave room for more diversity.
Posted by: Matthew Tiffany at May 9, 2007 4:46:46 PM
It would be rather more convenient if the newspapers provide clear, consise and brief analysis of the book reviews.
Posted by: Smart Card Development Solutions Consultancy at May 30, 2007 7:20:56 AM
More the brand is marketed or talked about it gives an idea that this thing is good nad important.So these kinds of reviews make you to come accros some really good stuff.
Posted by: Outsourced Product Development Center at May 30, 2007 7:24:35 AM
I sometimes get a look on the reviews of the books because i dont have much time to go through the whole book.So it saves my time as well makes me aware of what actally is that book all about.
Posted by: Offshore Software Product Testing at May 30, 2007 7:28:28 AM
Victoria's Secret Victorias Secret New Victoria's Secret Fashion show Victorias secret pink Victorias secret model Victorias Secret Credit Card Victorias Secret Angel Card Victorias secret coupon code Victorias secret lingerie Victorias secret fashion show 2005 Victorias secret fashion show 2006 Victorias Secret bra Victorias secret catalog victorias secret pantie victorias secret online coupon Victorias secret girl TATTOOS
CELTIC TATTOO TRIBAL TATTOOS DRAGON TATTOOS ANGEL TATTOOS CHINESE TATTOOS STAR TATTOOS CROSS TATTOOS HENNA TATTOOS BUTTERFLY TATTOOS TRIBAL BUTTERFLY TATTOOS HEART TATTOOS FAIRY TATTOOS LOWER BACK TATTOOS TRIBAL ART TATTOOS TRIBAL TATTOO DESIGN SKULL TATTOOS
TATTOO KIT
Posted by: Victorias credit Card at Jun 3, 2007 1:02:55 AM
メタボリックシンドロームについて。
平成20年の4月に特定健診が始まり、管理栄養士や栄養士が生活習慣病予備軍に対する保健指導を行います。
内臓脂肪を落とすためのダイエットなどを指導します。
特定健診とはメタボリックシンドローム 基準を満たした人に栄養士や管理栄養士がメタボリックシンドローム 予防やメタボリックシンドローム 食事などを指導することです。
Posted by: ii at Nov 15, 2007 2:38:26 AM
ヤフー
[url=http://www.yahoo.co.jp/]夜風[/url]
Posted by: yahoo at Mar 7, 2008 4:41:45 AM
