Most reviewers don't read their books
February 26, 2003 (5:24 PM) ( link )

An article entitled "Read Any Good Books Lately?" makes the following simple point: "[S]hocking as it may seem, the truth is that some reviewers skip some books. And there are a few who skip through all the books."

How do book reviewers do it? Sometimes they just describe the book to an eager readership; sometimes they write in generalities about the subject of the book; and, if all else fails, they praise the book, "for authors are more inclined to forgive errors when they come floating in a warm bath of praise than when they come coated in vitriol."

I imagine that being a professional book reviewer is a terrible job: you can't read the books you want, many of the books you do read are junk, and you feel like you're working when you should be enjoying yourself. Being an amateur book reviewer, on the other hand, is a lot more fun. And I can even guarantee that every review I write--whether positive or negative--is my honest opinion about a book that I actually read.