The Washington herald., 1915-07-15
Book Reviewing.

BY JOHN d. BARRY.
COME time ago read a review of a book by a
~ distinguished writer. The reviewer had a
fine time holding that writer up to ridcule. He
made plain that in his opinion, the reviewer OF
the book a much cleverer person than the
writer of the book. 1ncidently, he published some
quotations that certainly did sound ridiculous.
After reading the review l was puzzled. had
read other books by that writer with grea,
pleasure Would it be worth my while to read this
particular book? I finally decided that, for
curiosity. I would get the book and see whether
l agreed with the reviewers opinion.
To my amazement, 1 received from the book
an entirely different impression than that book re-
viewer had apparently received. Even those quo
tations. SO ridiculous when taken out of the text
conveyed, when in their place, wholly different
meaning, meaning far from ridiculous.
Then l perceived that the reviewer had looked
at the book from hostile point of view He had
not tried to put himself in sympathy with the
writer. He had taken pleasure in being unsyn-
pathetic in seizing the chance to make fun and to
display his own importance.
Often nowadays l am impressed by the self
Importance of book reviewers. 1t is particularly
surprising to observe the way some of them pass
Judgment, severe judgment, too, writers who
are established authorities. l have known books
which writer's have spent years in preparing to be
ruthlessly condemned by some slap-dash and ir-
responsible reviewer
Now, whenever I see review that is clever
at the expense OF the writer, l know that it is
not to be trusted. 1t shows that the writer has
gone at his task in wholly wrong spirit, spirit
that makes it impossible for him to be Just Be-
Sides where the reviewer exploits his own clever
ness he introduces an element that has no real
relation to the subject in hand, tiresome dis
traction. 1t is much it, ir announcing that he
was going to discuss a certain matter, he had
made sudden change of subject
The reviewing of books Of serious importance
ought. of course to be placed wholly in the hands
OF experts. There are many publications that
try to follow this obviously fair system Through
out the country there are many reviewers of great
ability, women and men, who take their work
seriously and conscientiously meet its require
ments. Where serious book falls into the hands
OF reviewer incapable of passing sound judg-
ment it the best the reviewer can do is to
let the writer speak for himself. In every book
there is at least passage that conveys
Of the writer's message. The repro
duction of that passage is far more valuable than
perhaps far more valuable than any comment of
any kind.
l sometime wish that periodicals would give
less space to opinions about books and more space
to quotations from the books themselves Then
readers would get their information at first hand
and be able to tell, from the taste which they
receive, whether they wish to read the whole
book
Perhaps the most unscientihc of all reviewing
is done among books of fiction. Here there is
standard. Reviewers of novels so
often reveal nothing but the personal preference
OF the reviewer. l have read criticisms of novels
where the very qualities condemned have SEEM
ed to me to be highly commendable qualities
lhe reviewers have simply disliked that kind
OF thing and, according to the habit of so many
OF us in everyday life, they have yielded to the
impulse to condemn and to try to destroy what
they dislike. That other people may like these
very things they apparently don't take into ac-
count.
1t is only the exceptional reviewer who strives
to take the point OF the novel writer, TO see what
the novel writer is trying to do and to decide
whether it is worth doing and whether j, has
been we'll done
Every writer has had experience with book
re'ie"inG winch g wonder to the way
in which some re, . do their work A ie,
years ago IN Lite list quoted from doz-
en- reviews ot his pry onc-half Of then
favorable and the other half directly contra
dieting the very points which had received the
highest praise. Here was an illustration of ,h
personal quality OF the reviewer. quality which
ought not to enter into reviewing at all
1t is not of the least importance for 2 re-
viewer to say, 81 like the book" or 81 don't
like that book What is important is for him
to make the reader see just the kind of book
it is so that the reader may decide whether he
wishes to read it or not