Different
publications review different types of books and they allow different types of
conversations. For example, Booklist will not publish negative reviews, while,
as you have all seen, Kirkus has no problems with it. Ebook-only books, which
are increasingly popular especially in the romance genre, see little to no
reviews in professional publications unless they have a big name author, and
then still it's usually only RT Reviews (formally Romantic Times) or other
genre heavy publications. How does this
affect collection development?
The “genrefication” of review outlets
allows for purchasers to have access to reviews for a wide array of
publications in now multiple formats. However, it is troubling as to how much
more time is necessary to purchase for print, audio, and electronic formats. A
purchasing librarian in a small to medium sized public library has to pay
attention to dozens upon dozens of review outlets to make educated decisions to
the direction of the collection, on top of programming, administrative, and
other professional duties. As a full time, 40-hours-a-week, librarian, I have
approximately two to three hours a week to develop two full size collections.
And in many cases, server and client PC maintenance, YA programming, one-on-one
technology instruction, book clubs, and professional meetings take up all 40
hours.
As libraries are relying upon ebooks
to shore up and expand the all-important circulation numbers, longstanding
resources like Booklist and Library Journal must make the effort to
reviewing ebook-only titles for the sake of libraries, who need to realize and
accomplish their multifaceted vision for their communities.
I have posted two
more documents in the week five folder. One is two reviews of an ebook only
romantic suspense novel, one from a blog and one from Amazon. Look over the
reviews - do you feel they are both
reliable? How likely would you be to
buy this book for your library? Is this ebook even romantic suspense?
I do not feel that they are both
reliable. Without checking the Amazon user’s other reviews and based upon this
sole review, I feel that “Deborah’s” review is poorly written, with numerous
grammatical mistakes, and is missing any whiff of criticism, which should be
apparent in a four out of five star review. The blog review at least lends
written criticism worthy of a three out of five star review. The author has also
taken time to create a blog where readers can go who value their opinion. The
Amazon review is swaying the book’s aggregated score, which can impact its placement
on bestsellers lists without any critical merit.
The other document
contains some reviews of Angela's Ashes, by Frank McCourt, an incredibly
popular memoir. These reviews are all from professional publications, feel free
to find more on your own I just nabbed a few from the Book Review Digest
database for you. How do these reviews
make you feel about the possibility of adding Angela's Ashes to your
collection?
These reviews obviously help illuminate the importance of
having this memoir in any public, academic, or secondary school collection. Any
library that didn’t purchase this book when it was released in 1996 probably
purchased it when it won the Pulitzer Prize. Unlike some books that have films
made from them, the film Angela’s Ashes
probably did not have people clamoring to read the book for the first time (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/angelas_ashes/).
Whenever there is unanimity in reviews, purchasers should
take note that a book is a worthwhile purchase due to timelessness, popularity,
and/or literary value.
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 that with the expansion of the “blogosphere” (I
apologize wholeheartedly for using that horrible term), the number of books
being reviewed is more than ever. I do feel that books from established authors
whose books are required purchases (e.g. James Patterson, Janet Evanovich,
David Baldacci) should have fewer reviews so that the valuable printed space
can be dedicated towards new authors, or even authors of under-reviewed genres,
like GLBTQ, science fiction, fantasy, and urban.
Without specifically getting into what budgetary issues
facing the average public library do to collection development, even the best
funded public library will have to delve deeply into established and periphery
review sources to develop a diverse collection necessary to serve a diverse
population. Review sources, even blogs, that focus on the books that will sell
tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of copies does not help the time,
effort, and hard work librarians everywhere have to do to keep the library as a
place for reading and learning anything anyone may want or need.
And how do you feel about review sources that won't print
negative content? Do you think that's appropriate?
I believe that review sources take the approach that “any
publicity is good publicity.” With printed resources, like PW, LJ, and Booklist, printed space is limited and
they would use their relatively limited space in promoting good books rather
than trashing bad books. Online resources and blogs have unlimited space to do
what they feel is necessary based upon their professional journalistic ethics.
If librarians do not feel it is appropriate for sources
to not print negative content, than they should not utilize those sources.
While I view Kirkus
as the Consumer Reports of book
reviewers, their approach to review good and bad content does not invalidate
the approaches and content by more “positive” review sources.
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?
I purchase the both the young adult and music collections
at my library. For music, review aggregate sites, like Metacritic, provide an
invaluable resource for a time-constrained purchasing librarian. When on the
fence whether to purchase an item, having access to multiple reviews on the
same webpage helps me make a final decision.
There are not as many aggregate websites available for
books as there are for other media. Following best-seller lists, I depend upon
review sources from that have proven their worth in creating a well-rounded
collection that my patrons enjoy perusing. For young adults, VOYA and Kirkus have been my go-to sources for reviews. I also look through Publisher’s Weekly, School Library Journal, and a few blogs, including the Teen
Librarian Toolbox (which has been recently acquired by SLJ).
When it comes to purchasing books, I would say that my
decisions are about 40% bestseller lists (Amazon, NYT), 30% reviews from
journals (e.g. VOYA), 20% reviews
from blogs, Amazon, and Goodreads, and 10% from lists from outlets like NPR and
information provided by YALSA and other organizations.
I also think that standing orders are invaluable in maintaining a collection.
ReplyDeleteI'm not involved in purchasing for my library, but we have a dedicated selector for YA/Children's and another for Adult materials. I think that they probably have quite a bit more time available for the task than you get because that's their major job responsibility. We also have an acquisitions person who's responsible for placing the actual orders. I can't imagine having all of those tasks charged to one person--I admire your commitment! One thing that I like the most about Kirkus is that their reviews of many bestsellers include a "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" (buy it, borrow it, skip it). I would imagine this is an extremely helpful feature for someone like you who has limited time to make collection development decisions. You can see, literally at a glance, which books are best-reviewed or worst-reviewed. Have you personally used this feature in your selection decisions?
ReplyDelete