Week 5 Prompt Responses

Reviewers are as unique as any business in America, and the diversity we see with models for review shouldn't come to a surprise to anyone. A publication like Booklist, who refuses to publish bad reviews, relies on a readership that appreciates their integrity and structure--the advantage here is that anyone doing acquisitions can simply flip to any page of the publication and find a worthwhile purchase for their library without having to separate the good from the bad themselves.  A publication like the Kirkus Review, on the other hand, might appeal to people who seek some guidance, but would ultimately like to make their decisions based on their own opinions. In regard to eBooks, the fact of the matter is that most main stream publishers have an extremely arduous process when it comes submission and acceptance--which represents a higher degree of quality control-- while eBooks are cheap and easy to produce through a vanity press that may have a universal, cost-based acceptance policy.  Major book reviewers understand this, and may shun unheralded eBooks in any genre-- not just romance-- because of the lack of any kind of editorial standards for self-published books. However, the success of books like "Fifty Shades of Grey," has proven that eBooks published through vanity presses can still gain traction on a grass-roots level and eventually turn into best-sellers.

Ultimately, both the Amazon review and the blogger's review of "The Billionaire's First Christmas," amount to one person's opinion.  While every person has the right to an opinion, and every person's opinion is valid, a review from an organization such as the New York Times--where the reviewer undoubtedly needed an educational background in a literary field of study--should (and typically does) hold more weight with consumers. I would likely buy this book for my library, but that has more to do with the fact that this genre of literature circulates extremely well at my library than how the book has been rated by these reviewers.

"Angela's Ashes," is a wildly popular memoir for a reason-- it met extremely stringent publishing standards and was positively received by major reviewers with substantial backgrounds in the literary field.  When books that come from major publishers are given more attention and granted more accolades it's typically because they are better books, plain and simple. Every book may be submitted to major publishers and they all stand the same change of being accepted.

I'm reminded of the the classic response given by the actor, author, comedian and musician, Steve Martin, when he was asked for advice on "how to make it" by an aspiring comedian: "Be undeniably brilliant." I believe that reviews from "credible" sources ("credible" meaning reviewers that only employ people with a substantial background studying the relevant field of discipline) are more important than they've ever been, given that it's easier to publish and distribute books to a large audience than at any prior point in history.  Ultimately, however, I think it is up to the librarians serving their communities to find books that will appeal to their patrons regardless of how positively they are reviewed, and that a review is only as reputable as the person writing the review.