Look over the reviews - do you feel they are both reliable? How likely would you be to buy this book for your library?
The two ebook only reviews were hard to read. Both suffered from poor grammar and a lack of punctuation that detracted from the authors’ comments and my impression of them as reliable sources. The Amazon comment came across as more authentic than the blog post.
The Amazon reviewer clearly liked the book and summarized her feelings in a brief remark next to her rating: “Beautiful, sweet, Christmas romance.”
The blogger’s review was visually appealing, but confusing. In one paragraph the reviewer states, “It’s too Christmassy…” The last paragraph begins with, “I wasn’t hooked to the core, but it’s okay.” The last few sentences of the review seemed to contradict those earlier comments:
“I felt it’s just the right choice. I started really feeling the season. Very warm and cozy and I actually enjoyed this one despite finding the plot odd.”
Another feature of the blog was the stark contrast in writing style between the summary and the review. It did not seem as though the same person had written those sections, but there was no attribution to another source. I did not find the blogger to be a reliable source and would not use them for future collection decisions.
If there is demand for this type of title I would consider buying it. The decision would also depend on selection criteria such as availability of similar titles and pricing.
How do these reviews make you feel about the possibility of adding Angela's Ashes to your collection?
The School Library Journal review glossed over McCourt’s graphic description of his wretched childhood. “He recounts his desperately poor early years, living on public assistance and losing three siblings, but manages to make the book funny and uplifting.” The review had a strange juxtaposition of comments. The reviewer says young people will recognize “the casual cruelty adults show toward children.” That observation is immediately followed by “Readers will enjoy the humor and the music in the language.” I received the strange impression that this was a humorous children’s book with sad elements.
I disagree with the Library Journal review that recommends the book “for readers of any age.” Neither this review nor the School Library Journal review provides an excerpt or description of the memoir’s darker moments and more mature subject matter.
The Kirkus and Booklist reviews provide a clearer glimpse into the complex, evocative language that brings McCourt’s harrowing childhood to life.
“Dying was what everyone seemed to do best: the little sister, the twins, the girl with
whom Frank first had sex, the old man Frank read to, too many boys from school, too
many neighbors, too many relatives.” (Booklist)
“Forced to move in with an abusive cousin, McCourt became aware that the man and his mother were having "the excitement'' up there in their grubby loft. After taking a beating from the man, McCourt ran away to stay with an uncle and spent his teens alternating between petty crime and odd jobs.” (Kirkus)
The authoritative sources for these reviews would influence my decision to include this book in the library’s collection. If I were only reading the School Library Journal and Library Journal reviews (and did not know that Angela’s Ashes had won the Pulitzer Prize in the biography category), I might have placed the book in the children’s collection. After reading the Kirkus and Booklist reviews, I would place the book in the young adult and adult collections.
Do you think it's fair that one type of book is reviewed to death and other types of books get little to no coverage? How does this affect a library's collection?
I think it is an unfortunate reality that some book publishers have substantial marketing resources and other publishers have little or none. Publishers’ marketing efforts influence the public’s awareness of particular books. Review sources build awareness and influence perceptions of new books. The proliferation of independent publishers, self-publishing, and social networking sites has inundated collectors, reviewers, and the public with new titles. Collection selection does not have to be based entirely on reviews, but time constraints mean that librarians often rely on reviews to inform collection decisions.
In response to the growth of new formats and genres, our library’s collection development has become more specialized. Individual librarians are responsible for particular collections and/or collection sections (such as picture books or the 400s section of non-fiction). This allows collectors to discover review sources they trust, and to learn about upcoming releases from a wider range of publishers.
And how do you feel about review sources that won't print negative content? Do you think that's appropriate? If you buy for your library, how often do you use reviews to make your decisions? If not, how do you feel about reviews for personal reading, and what are some of your favorite review sources?
If a review source does not print negative content, the reason behind their decision needs to be clearly stated. Does the review source only review titles it likes? Does that mean they do not like other titles, or that they deem particular titles to be exemplary and deserving of a review? Should more value be placed on those reviews because they are more selective in their choices? According to its website, Booklist has had its “recommended-only” policy since its founding in 1905. That policy
“has been adapted over the decades to reflect changes in the philosophy of public library service. Thus, materials are recommended for reasons relating to both quality and demand” (Booklist).
Collectors develop review source preferences over time. When collectors change, the collection’s composition will likely change to reflect the new librarian’s perspective.
I am not a collector. When I find a book or series I like, I usually look for read-alikes. I do not seek out reviews to make personal reading choices, but I have come across books for my personal reading when I read journals at work. Some of my favorite review sources are Publishers Weekly, Kirkus, and the New York Times Book Review. I find upcoming titles in Publishers Weekly. If I want more guidance, I read the other two sources which tend to give me a clearer insight into whether or not the author has a style and language that appeal to me.
References
Booklist. (1999). Booklist selection policy. ALA. Retrieved from
http://www.ala.org/aboutala/offices/booklist/insidebooklist/booklistpolicy/booklistselction
