writing book reviews

I’ve also just finished the first draft of my review of Jane Bennett’s Vibrant Matter, which will appear in print before too long. It was slated for 3,000 words, which is reasonably long for a book review. But these things are easy to write any time a book has a clear thesis.

Anyone looking for an advice post tonight? I thought so. Here goes (but it will be short, since of course I’m still nursing the jet lag).

How to go about reading (or rereading) a book when you’ve been asked to review it:

*make a marginal note every time something in the book sincerely impacts you positively or negatively. We want your real reactions to the book. We don’t want to hear fake devil’s advocate criticisms of things that one might criticize or (less often) that one might pretend is cool. We’re not interested in the reviewer scoring points with the Big Other. We want a reviewer who is alive and breathing and giving us his/her true personal reactions to the book. Remember, your true personal reactions to any book will be somewhat different from anyone else’s. Don’t pretend to be someone you’re not. Give us what you really think. The first step in doing this is to make marginal notes only when you are honestly affected positively or negatively by something that the author says.

*in this case these marginal notes should be words, not just check-marks or stars. When actually writing the review you will want to be able to go back through the book rapidly, just scanning for the most intense positive or negative reactions you had.

*as a rule, there will be too many of these to fit into a review. In order to winnow them down, do the following. For each chapter, put all those thoughts in order on a piece of paper. Then look at the list when you’re done and start to organize them. In the case of Bennett’s book there are a long preface and eight chapters. Pick the four or five most important points on your list and figure out a way to weave them into a paragraph of the appropriate length.

*what I ended up with for a review is an introductory paragraph, followed with chapter-by-chapter summaries of the entire book, followed by a couple of concluding paragraphs. Go back through and edit it once, looking for lacunae in your thought process (there will probably be some, and you’ll need to fill them in).

*don’t send off the review after the first read-through. Sleep on it at least once, and if possible then several times. Things that look good tonight could appear lame when viewed with fresh morning eyes.

Although candor is always necessary in book reviews, avoid harshness unless there are reasons that you really need to declare open war on a particular book or school of thought (or unless the author in question was as harsh or harsher in his/her treatment of others, in which case you’re not the one who set the tone). Remember: the author of the book will most likely be reading your review. If you write something that weakens or saddens the author, you’re not doing the world a favor in most cases. The same could easily happen to you too (and it eventually will, as soon as you’ve published a book).

Whenever possible, try to focus on things that you learned from the book. Not only is it more kind to the author, it also keeps you focused on your own limitations, and on the all-important ability of books to surprise us.

In the case of Bennett’s book, it’s a pretty easy task because she and I agree on most of the key points. Or at least we agree on who the enemies are. Where we disagree, for the most part, is where to go next. Her book ends with an irreverent “Nicene Creed” in honor of “one matter-energy, the maker of things seen and unseen.” Of course, I strongly dislike the idea of one matter-energy, which is inimical to my entire position. But there is so much agreement up to that point that it ends up being nothing but a spicy critical twist at the end of a largely positive review. It’s remarkable how many false friends Bennett avoids enlisting. Some of her good rejections are of the following notions: “recalcitrance of the real,” “embodiment,” “inscrutable vitality vs. calculable matter.” These are all half-measures, and Bennett has a notable talent for not being duped by half-measures.