![]() |
Boyhood Line, Richard Long |
Does anyone buy a book as a result of a review? Yes, quite probably, it can sway such a decision. Does anyone not buy a book as a result of a review, yes, certainly. And more, a negative, especially if unfair, review can be damaging to a poet's reputation, and that of their editors and the press, which begs the questions: why would you write an overly critical review in the first place? why would a magazine publish it?
Slipping back to the reviewing culture of the 1970s and 1980s is unwelcome. No-one needs to be as mean-spirited as Clive James' Observer review of Elaine Feinstein's TV play, 'Breath', which was broadcast on the BBC in 1975. Of it he says 'Miss Feinstein reminds me of the American writer, Joan Didion. Both have a fastidiously elegant approach to pain and a natural disinclination to concern themselves with anything else'. Or as dismissive as James Thompson in the Daily Express who concluded 'And in the best traditions of the women's magazine story, her [Nell, the main character] asthma disappeared...' Ouch!
To avoid this (un)kind of thing, I use the following as my guide in writing reviews, which readers in the same position might find helpful.
First things first, it's probably worth thinking about why you are writing the review and what qualifies you to do so - is it your full-time job? (unlikely), are you being asked to write about a book you didn't choose? (perhaps), are you being asked to write about a book you did chose? (more likely, perhaps), are you a practising critic with academic training? (slightly different focus needed for a magazine review), are you a practising poet? (helps but not necessarily so), are you a keen reader of contemporary poetry? (essential), or do you have a particular axe to grind? (your own prejudices may need reigning in).
If you are writing about a book that you find yourself being too critical of, you can always say, no. Applying the Thumper* theory that if you can't say anything nice, you are perhaps better not saying anything at all for the sake of the poet, the editors and your own reputation. I have on ocassion had to say no in such circumstances as I really don't want to hurt someone, or indeed myself. Does this mean reviewing is a praise only sport? No, not necessarily, one can temper criticism by praising the good things first and the less good in balance, and without sticking the boot in.
To my mind the following things probably don't work:
1. Not reading the book thoroughly enough. I find I need to read it at least three times, firstly to get a sense of the whole, secondly to look at individual poems in detail and then again to spot all the things I missed on the other readings. If you don't have the time and patience for this, then don't put pen to paper.
2. Criticising someone for the very fact of doing poetry performances as if by implication that makes them a lesser page poet. It doesn't. We all need to read our work to audiences these days to generate sales. Poetry definitely is an aural art form and reading one's work well in public is very much part of conveying it to an audience of (later) readers.
3. Stating that the poet has not used much rhyme or a particular form with the implied criticism that rhyme or form is good and unrhymed or free verse poetry is not, is just plain odd. Free verse and unrhymed poetry have been a thing for a century or more.
4. Repeating criticism and giving the poet concluding notes on how to write in the future are the kind of tips one might mention in private or in a workshop setting, not a review.
5. Criticising the poet and the editing because you would not have included certain lines. That's a difficult one - what may be obvious to you may not be obvious to another reader. I think one can err on the side of poets being generous to their readers and not wrapping things in too much obscurity.
6. Digression - if you have a particular yearning for say, more pamphlets, and want to encourage the publisher to produce them, that is interesting, but not terribly relevant when you are reviewing a full collection. An article on the benefits of such is worth your time, just elsewhere.
7. Taking the opportunity to slam the poetry ecosystem for everything you think is wrong with it such as: fake endorsements - when everyone knows these are puffs, no-one is fooled, most of the time they are a helpful guide to the topics of a book and the way it's been written; saying prize giving is predictable - I consider myself to be pretty well read in contemporary poetry, but not one of the 2024 Forward winners, for example, were known to me; or hating on celebrity books, when these sell in the kind of numbers that enable presses to go on taking a chance on all our work - horses for courses, and who, after all, is to say you, or indeed I, have the monopoly on taste.
* although the cartoon rabbit puts it a little less elegantly ('If you can't say nothing nice, don't say nothing at all,' I think he utters).