People's picks

by Stacey

My magazine pile has diminished the last few years as I've had less time to spend flipping through glossy pages. But I still like to keep up with the ultimate guilty pleasure, People, not only to follow the latest celeb gossip, but also to keep my finger on the pulse of what's truly commercial as far as music, tv, and yes, even books. Their regular book coverage is such an unusual blend of titles, almost always paying attention to the books that everyone is talking about, the commercial ones at least. A few recent books reviewed or covered include the new John Grisham, Nora Ephron's latest nonfiction, former White House communications director Nicolle Wallace's first Washington novel, and Jessica Seinfeld's second cookbook. Earlyword.com has a list of all the books they review each week. You can see the broad range of well-known and noteworthy authors, but I wonder if they don't compromise on quality when considering what to highlight and if they don't underestimate that their readers just might be interested in a more literary novel, or a more serious piece of nonfiction.

The coverage is limited to just a few pages per issue so there's not a lot of room for lots of titles. Given that fact, I'm fascinated that they almost always give 3-4 stars (out of 4) to everything they review. So does that mean they only review books they think are really good? Or are they choosing titles they think their readers will enjoy? Or do they have really easy critics? Or is it just books that they know are the ones that will be getting the most publicity in other media? If the latter is the case, I'd be surprised that they are all so well reviewed. I don't know the answers, and I think it's probably some combination of all of these things, but I know I'm always curious to see what's highlighted each week. And while I don't always like their reviews or the books they choose to focus on, I am grateful that they still have a Books section at all in this difficult market!

I wonder what our readers think of People's choices, both in terms of what they are highlighting and reviewing, and if the reviews have any weight with consumers buying books. I'm not sure there's much direct impact on sales, especially since so many of the titles are also covered in other media, but I do think the number of eyes the magazine gets is great publicity for any book that's covered, especially since it's bound to get a good review! Is People worth reading for book reviews and coverage, and have you ever purchased a book because you saw it in the magazine? Let us know, we'd love to hear from you.

A welcome to the new kid on the block!

by Jane

Over the last couple of years, due to the deteriorating economy and a lack of advertising revenue, many of the nation’s major newspapers have dropped their book review sections. We have all watched this with great sadness (much as we watched the closing of so many independent bookstores over the past fifteen years) as the fewer book reviews consumers can read, the less they will be inclined to search out new and interesting authors and their work.

So, I was absolutely thrilled yesterday when I opened the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal to see their new Book Section. Not only are there lots of interesting and well written reviews, but there are also articles about bestselling authors (Jeff Trachtenberg, for example, writes about Philip Roth) and pieces about subjects like writers’ retreats and how blogging has influenced the economy. There is even an op-ed (sort of) on the Kindle and its effectiveness and another on writing.

All of this is very exciting and I can only hope that this new section will be hugely successful so as to encourage other major market newspapers to rethink their decisions to eliminate their book reviews.

What do you think?

Another outlet for a Franzen review

by Michael

It's another slow week in publishing, with Labor Day and Rosh Hashanah causing a great calm before the storm. But even in this slow week, there's big news: The Wall Street Journal will launch a weekly, stand-alone book review section later this month. With so many other papers closing down their book reviews, this is great news. The more book coverage, the better, and I'm eager to see how the Journal will compare with the New York Times Book Review.

Picking your battles

by Jim

As Jessica discussed last week, authors Jodi Picoult and Jennifer Weiner have been vocally irritated by the raves for Jonathan Franzen’s new book, Freedom. They’ve lashed out at the New York Times for focusing too much on white male authors but also for their almost complete discounting of all commercial fiction. These are points that lend themselves to ample debate. I’ve mentioned before that I think fiction across categories and types can be brilliant. And I have ample concerns about the blinding whiteness of the literary landscape (which is a topic for a whooooole other post). So why do I find myself so irritated by the articles coming out?

First of all, it’s a little tough to stomach the argument when it’s coming from two of the bestselling authors in the country. Why are they so angry they aren’t getting reviews? Can’t they just dive into their money a la Scrooge McDuck whenever they need to feel loved? I’d find this a lot easier to stomach coming from someone straddling the commercial/literary divide who hadn’t broken out and needed reviews to break through.

Second, did you catch this in the Guardian article? “Picoult also criticised Kakutani's use of the word ‘lapidary.’ ‘Did you know what [it] meant when you read it in Kakutani's review? I think reviewers just like to look smart,’ she tweeted.” Oh no, she didn’t… Mocking someone for using a “smart” word is already ignorant. But coming from an author? That’s disgraceful. Working with language is what you DO. If you want to understand why people don’t take you seriously, you probably shouldn’t indicate that you yourself don’t take the language that seriously. Not knowing the word? Totally fine. It’s not like I don’t make regular stops at dictionary.com. But Picoult’s tweet is just anti-intellectual and insulting.

Mostly, though, I’m annoyed because these articles are linked to a novel by someone whose last effort, nine years ago, was a masterpiece. People aren’t excited about Freedom because it’s by a white man. They’re enthusiastic about getting to dive back into the landscapes of the person who created The Corrections, one of the best written, most deeply moving novels of the past decade. Pick on someone divisive like Jonathan Safran-Foer or someone whose output is uneven like Jonathan Lethem. Hell, they even have the same first names and all live in the same borough of New York City. But attacking Franzen…you’re just sabotaging your own arguments.

I’m probably exposing all sorts of biases here. What do you all think?

Gender bias?

by Jessica

Apropos of Miriam’s post on the euphoric reception to Jonathan Franzen’s new novel, at least two novelists have cried foul. Not about Franzen’s book per se, but the case, advanced by Jodi Picoult and seconded by Jennifer Weiner, that the NYT Book Review favors writers who are “white and male and live in Brooklyn.” Good news for this fairly sizeable demographic; Brooklyn boys with literary leanings can now rest easier knowing that their eventual literary efforts will receive proper critical attention.

I’ve followed the ensuing discussion over the last week with interest. In the Atlantic, Spiegel and Grau editor Chris Jackson weighed in with “All the Sad Young Literary Women.” A female colleague asked him to name some female novelists whose work he had read recently, and he confessed that for a moment, he couldn’t think of any (turns out, however, that he had read at least one). This prompted me to go through my own recent reads, seeing how I measure up.

I tend to read plenty of books by women authors, but I’ve never bothered to quantify or implement a quota system. In the last couple of weeks I’ve been in something of a Y chromosome rut, reading Evelyn Waugh, whose books, aside from Scoop, I’ve not read before—Brideshead Revisited, his World War II Trilogy. Fine writer, that Waugh, but something of a snob. I did, however attempt to balance the scales by reading some Muriel Spark, in order to get a female perspective on the foibles of British bluestockings.

How about you? What do you think of Picoult’s charge? How does your own reading compare?

Damning with great praise

by Miriam

Saying that the reviews for Jonathan Franzen’s Freedom have been positive is like saying McDonald's has sold a few burgers. Running the gamut from “a work of total genius” (New York Magazine) to “a masterpiece” (The New York Times Book Review)—and those are just the local rags—the orgasmic praise is, frankly, a little daunting. The expectations for this book are so high (from readers, booksellers and the novel’s publisher) that even President Obama getting an A.R.C. from a bookseller while on vacation in Martha’s Vineyard set off an industry panic attack.

As someone who read The Corrections with equal measures wonder and awe, I plan to get my copy of Freedom as soon as I can find my way to a bookstore when the book pubs next week. I worry, however, that, after all the early hosannas, I will find a comfortable chair, bribe my husband and four-year-old to give me a few hours of uninterrupted reading time, and find myself…disappointed. I am determined to come to the book with an open mind despite all the raves I’ve already been privy to, but Mr. Franzen is going to have to wow me anew before I jump on the laudatory bandwagon. I do feel for the guy, though. That mountain of praise is a long uphill climb.

Do you guys ever resent the media hype of big books (if I see one more Facebook post about Mockingjay…) and do you feel it negatively impacts your reading experience?

Effusive encomia

by Jessica

I’m a great believer in the value of blurbs, and I pay careful attention to who has weighed in on the cover copy of any given book, but, thanks to Galley Cat, I could not help but chuckle at The Guardian’s contest, which was spurred by Nicole Krauss’s glowing-to-the-point-of-incandescent endorsement of David Grossman’s new novel To The End of the Land. Grossman’s book is on my to-read pile, and I am now keen to see the degree to which I agree with Ms. Krauss rapturous praise.

To what degree do endorsements matter to you? Will you read a new writer based on the recommendation of a beloved author? Can you offer any examples?

A gritty, unflinching and epic blog post

by Rachel

Michelle Kerns has read my mind. In her blog for the Examiner, Michelle points out a literary epidemic--the dull and clichéd book review. I agree with Michelle that there is nothing worse than reading a review where the words “compelling,” “tour de force,” and “readable” are used to describe a literary work. Readable? Really?!

So, in order to draw attention to those book review offenders, she invented a new game: Book Review Bingo!

If you go ahead and play this, beware! You’ll be surprised as to how fast you shout “Bingo!” with the reading of a couple of book reviews.  It only took me three! Did anyone beat me? And which riveting and timely cliché is your (least) favorite?

Endangered book ads?

by Jessica

As the week begins, I am feeling decidedly under the weather; last night, I was flipping through magazines in a somewhat desultory fashion, rereading the same sentences again and again, watching paragraphs swim before my eyes, and otherwise making little actual headway. The time I failed to spend reading, however, I devoted to looking at pictures. Namely, book ads. Which are, along with the New Yorker’s weird assortment of sterling silver pet pins/pendants (who, I ask, buys the “European Beret?”), of particular interest. Book ads—whether placed in publication local or national—have long been a staple of publishers’ promotional arsenal, but I’m curious to get your take: has an ad ever driven, or even heavily influenced, your decision to buy a book?

I’m not sure that I can point to a time when an ad alone propelled me to the bookstore (or the library) though February’s Harper’s boasts a full page ad for 36 Arguments for the Existence of God that may well do the trick. I was pleased to spot a New Yorker ad for Simon Mawer’s superb The Glass Room, and I hope that it will drive other readers toward this very smart novel. But it’s difficult to measure the impact of traditional advertising—no click-throughs, no totting up eye-balls or page views. Which is why I’d love to hear your opinion. Do you pay attention to print book ads? Where do they have most impact? Do they influence your choice? And if not, what does?

Publishers, as you probably realize, do not run ads for every book they publish. Advertising and marketing dollars are carefully allocated, with big names generally commanding the biggest budgets (and sometimes the budgets, period) and usually, ads are given to books that are: 1) lead titles 2) already working 3) or have garnered such astonishing reviews that it makes sense to pay to shout it from the rooftops. Publishers rarely count on ads to get the ball rolling, but rather to build or maintain existing momentum. So perhaps an ad alone would not motivate a sale, but a good review, and interview on NPR, capped off by an effective ad in a favorite magazine (one that quotes the other review you might have missed) these might create some sort of tipping point.

Not everyone agrees with this hypothetical; indeed, there are plenty of people who think ads are essentially useless (or worse yet, expensive ways of appeasing agents and big-name authors). Whatever the reason, publishers have certainly cut back. The NYTBR is still the sine qua non, but even there, the costs of a full page ads has fallen precipitously.

When, for better or for worse, publishers decide that the traditional ad model doesn’t work (too much money for too little gain) it has unintended ripple effects across the publishing ecosystem. Falling ad revenue shuttered both the Washington Post Book World and the LA Times Book Review, which in turn means fewer influential places to be reviewed. There are, of course, many book-related sites online, but so far, none have quite the reach that publishers are hoping for.

I’m curious to know how you weigh in.

The importance of the book review

by Jane

Last week I was having lunch with the associate publisher of a major publishing house who was a bit late because he had to deal with the following situation: One of his authors had sent him a draft of a letter her husband, a lawyer, was going to send to Amazon threatening a lawsuit if they didn’t take down a negative Publisher’s Weekly review of her book.

My lunch companion managed to stop this from happening, at least for the time being. But it got me to thinking that in this age of blogging (and the internet in general), how important are reviews from the traditional consumer and trade outlets? I went online and found many, many websites and blogs that are set up specifically to “review” and recommend certain categories of books.

There is no doubt in my mind that book reviews do influence what people buy. But it seems to me that more and more readers want to know what their peers think, rather than reading the opinion of a bestselling author or an academic who might be considered more “qualified” to review a certain title.

I really believe consumers are relying less and less on the traditional review outlets, trade magazines like Publishers Weekly, Library Journal, Booklist and Kirkus (if it survives) and major market newspapers, many of which have closed their book sections--and are going to those blogs and websites established solely to review books.

I would love to know if you agree.

High expectations

by Stacey

It occurred to me as a publishing professional reading this painful review of Elizabeth Gilbert's new book that there is a case to be made for unpublished authors having certain advantages over bestselling authors. No track record can be a very good thing when it comes to selling books. Granted, it's very hard to get noticed in the slush pile given the volume of submissions agents receive, and if you are lucky enough to find a good agent who will fight for your book, the hurdles to get it sold are often high and daunting. But let's say you get there and the book becomes a huge runaway hit. Then what? How does one follow up a success like Eat, Pray, Love, arguably one of the most successful books of the last decade? It sounds like from the descriptions I've been reading about Gilbert's experience, not easily. She wrote and trashed an entire draft of this book (I wince every time I think about the author, the editor, the publisher, the agent, and what they must have gone through during this grueling process), and based on Maslin's review, it sounds like she might have been better off doing the same for the final! For all the money and fame, there are real challenges that come with having a hit like Gilbert did, and while the book has certainly made her a millionaire and this follow-up is likely to have strong early sales based on name alone, it sounds like it might wind up being a disappointment because the expectations are just so high. Once you hit that mighty bestseller list, the conversations get more complicated, and the pressure to perform and beat the last one can be challenging at best and impossible to achieve at worst. Sometimes the dream is better than the reality, but isn't that often the case in life? If you are able to enjoy and savor the process of writing, stay focused on the positives, work hard and passionately despite any obstacles you might face, there's a lot to be grateful for doing what you love, especially at the start of a new year.

Authors gone wild!

by Jim

I was going to blog about this on Monday after the delightful and amazing Michelle Rowen called my attention to it. At the time, much of the content was missing from the web. Thank you, Guardian, for hunting it down.

Long story Twitter-short: Bad Amazon review makes author lose damn mind!

I can totally relate to Flood’s opinion here that watching an author have a spectacular public meltdown can be incredibly compelling stuff. Know what makes it even more special for an agent? Their clients’ lack of involvement!

This whole saga is really worth tracking through for examples of what never to do once you’re a published author. Don’t get defensive. Don’t respond to reviews on Amazon. And for gods’ sake, DON’T blame your editor!!

Like Neil Gaiman, I will claim not to be posting this because it’s funny in a tragic way (even though it totally is) but because it’s an extreme reminder of why the heat of the moment is NOT when to respond to one’s critics.

(via GalleyCat)

HARRY TRUMAN'S EXCELLENT ADVENTURE is an excellent success story

by Jane

When my client Matthew Algeo suggested the idea of doing a book about the road trip Harry Truman and his wife Bess took right after his presidency was over, I thought it was a terrific idea. The proposal went to 34 publishers in three different rounds beginning in April 2007 and finally selling in early July of that year. There were two bids on the project and Matthew chose Chicago Review Press, a small publisher with whom we do quite a bit of business.

The book was published earlier this year, has earned more than twice its advance and has received incredible reviews and press mentions which I am sharing here. Success stories like this one don’t happen often but when they do, I find them enormously gratifying:

Washington Post Book World
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
The Daily Herald (TN)
ArtVoice (NY)
Wisconsin Rapids Tribune
News-Sentinel (IN)
Pennsylvania Magazine
Pekarskie (PA) News-Herald 
Sauk Valley (IL) Weekend 
Ogle County (IL) Life/Rock Valley Shopper
TargetMarketingMag
Phillyburbs
XM/Sirius Radio’s The Ron and Fez Show
Kettering-Oakwood Times
History Magazine
Dayton Daily News
Memoirs of an Amnesiac
Columbus Dispatch
Carroll County (MD) Times
Jefferson City (MO) News Tribune
WTKF FM's Coastal Daybreak
Book Reviews
American Road
College & Research Libraries News
New Press (OK)
WGN-AM’s Extension 720 with Milt Rosenberg
Baltimore Sun's Read Street
JetSetting
Mountaineer (NC)
Cars & Parts
Nashville Public Library's Off the Shelf
Daily Reflector (NC)
Selma (CA) Enterprise
American Spirit
American History
Delaware State News
Baltimore Jewish Times
XM/Sirius Radio's Peter Greenberg Worldwide
Frederick (MD) Post
Pennsylvania Gazette
Virginian-Pilot
Dover (DE) Post
Something Good to Read
Presidents and Presidency of the United States
AAA Traveler
Indianapolis Star
Bucks County (PA) Herald
New York Times' In Transit
Newsmax
Journal of American Culture
Washington Post
Boing Boing
Urban Coaster
Dave's Travel Corner
Creative Loafing
Chowan (NC) Herald
BookPage
Jackson (MS) Free Press
Cumberland Times-News
Press-Telegram (CA)
Allegheny Radio Corporation's "Magic Morning Show"
WTCS-AM's "The Morning Show"
Appalachian Independent
WVON-AM's "Paul Lisnek Show"
WLS-AM's  "The Roe Conn Show"
Lake Michigan Shore
Illinois Radio Network's "Eye on Illinois"
Washington Times
KMBZ-AM's "Kansas City's Morning News"
Palladium-Item (IN)
WZUS-FM's "Scott and Scott in the Morning"
St. Louis Beacon
WMEA-FM's "Maine Things Considered"
WILP-AM's "Happenings Q&A"
KGO-AM's "The John Rothmann Show"
Riverfront Times
The Week
Herald and Review (IL)
History News Network
New Daily Record (MD)
Star-Democrat (MD)
Herald-Star (OH)
Columbia Daily Tribune (MO)
American Public Media's Marketplace
PW Daily
Bonner Springs-Edwardsville Chieftain (MO)
Oregonian
Staten Island Live
Examiner
Alfred Sun (NY)
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
Triphow
KCUR-FM's "The Walt Bodine Show"
KCMO's "The KCMO Morning Show"
Real Simple
World Hum
World Wide Woodard
Booklist
LJ Express
Publishers Weekly
Library Journal

Farewell, dear Kirkus!

by Michael

I was pretty shocked to see a tweet this morning that Kirkus would be no longer. Honestly, my emotions are rather mixed. My authors’ books have fared well (I had two author make their year-end round-up of the best young adult books), while others, who shall of course remain nameless, haven’t been so lucky. Though many different people wrote the reviews for Kirkus, there was always a very particular snarkiness about their bad reviews. I don’t think any other publication can make an author cry the same way that Kirkus did. On more than one occasion I have warned an author before the review to be prepared, because if you’ve never read one of their reviews and they go after you, it can be soul-crushing.

But when they did give an author and book a good review, it always meant that much more. Pleasing them wasn’t easy, so doing so was all the more satisfying. And if you were lucky enough to get a star, well, then you knew you’d written something not just great but truly worthy.

So even though I told authors again and again that Kirkus and those negative reviews didn’t matter (and they didn’t), I’m sincerely going to miss complaining about the harsh reviews and secretly cherishing the positive ones. Farewell, friend.