Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1902-10-11

''This is SO thoroughly understood that
| it argues a certain simplicity in one of
our monthly contemporaries that it has
formally asked the more prominent pub
| fishers if they like to have their books
| reviewed. There was not a very sur
prising unanimity in the response; all.
with single doubtful exception. wished
| to be reviewed on any terms. Probably
unanimity if asked whether they liked
to have the nearest farmer SOW white
clover or nothing. But if the publish
. ers agreed that review or press notice
was valuable to a book. they differed
| considerably in their opinion of review
ing as at present conducted. That the
reviewers were generally sincere was
conceded. Some went further and ad-
mitted that reviewing was usually COM
retent. but on this point there were mis-
givings. There was, however, a marked
tendency to accept things as they are.
and to assume that the modern book
world. broadly considered, is the best
possible world.
THE kind of review that is most in
evidence to-day is well characterized by
Professor Trent in the Forum:
''The extravagantly Mandatory review
written by well-known man of letters.
VINO, through kindheartedness or for some
otner reason, praises contemporary
book or writer in terms which he as
snredly would not use If he were dealing
with an author OF work of the past. No
reference is here made to mere notices in
literary supplements and other such jour
mails, or to what is sometimes called
log-roling, but to elaborate essays that
seem to the unwary reader impartial
studies of books and writer's. yet are real
~ friendly tributes or solicited advertise
ments. Reviews of this character are
becoming SO usual that it is scarcely nee
essary to cite examples. If they were
only friendly tributes. properly certified
as such, they could do little harm and
might do some good. But they are too
frequently solicited advertisements and
grossly misleading"
1t is by this ''urbane. not to saw
anaemic, criticism that the minor re-
viewers are guided and the tone is SO:
for book-reviewing generally. That II is
permanently advantageous to anybody is
very doubtful To-day it may seem 10
the publishers advantage that all their
books should be noticed and all recon-
mended, but whittier does this lead? Oh
Niousiy to bankruptcy of praise. and ut
yer skepticism on the part of the read
ing public. If perfunctory laudation is
to be the order of the day.,the press no
tees and reviews will gradually lose all
Naiue-even advertising yalue-and the
reading public will soon think of get
supplements as the skeptic thinks OF
getting religion on the strength of the
Prepare to meet thy God" Of a zeaIot |
mite on a wayside boulder.
me publishing trade in England and |
IN America is in most interesting tram
sition stage. The old, and we NAV say
Inc more rational, means of distribu-
tlon nave largely broken down. The |
publisher is losing direct touch with
MS customers and must act through
various agencies, such as the news-stands
ana the department stores which are
His hold upon the reading nuhiic is
perforce through the magazines and 1
newspapers. But the latter cannot COM
pei the respect of their readers unless
they have the discrimination to leave
worthless or wholly ephemeral books
unnoticed and the courage TO tell the
truth, favorable or unfavorable about /
fail in these qualities. the reviewers vii, 7
gradually become superfluous to pub
!ishers, authors. readers. and the press
Itself, and no heaping up Of literary per-