Book reviews are, of course, a subject of dispute across many sectors of the reading and publishing communities; Pool accurately points out that even defining the nature of a book review is fairly slippery. Professionals clash with amateurs; readers clash with critics. Essentially, however, the author notes that book reviewing centers specifically around new books, recent publications. A review should have two major elements, an accurate description of what the book's text encompasses and an evaluation or assessment of how well the book succeeds. Assuming that the book review is intended for formal publication, there is a deadline to be met. The reviewer is hampered by the need to make a relatively quick assessment without necessarily having time to properly digest the book. The review may not be literary criticism, but it should be able to serve as a guide for potential readers, guiding them away from mediocrity while spotlighting the good and hopefully the excellent. In Pool's eyes, the review should be "an essay, however brief, an argument, bolstered by insights and observations" (see page 11 of the hardcover).

Of course the gap between theory and the practical is always greater than we like to admit. Gail Pool spends the bulk of her time in this slim volume, explaining the real drivers of and constraints on reviews and reviewing in the real-world publishing business and how that impacts on the the process. She covers the reviewing process without glossing over the ugly bits -- reviews where it is clear the reviewer did not, in fact, read the book in question or instances where the review criticizes the author, not for having written a bad book, but for having written a book that did not meet a reviewer's preferences. She even notes the ever-present hyperbole and cliched phrasing of book reviews ("luminous prose", "towering achievement", etc.). But neither is she a fan of the Amazon.com reviews and she makes no apologies for her disdain. Pool recognizes that writing a good book review requires time to read the book, time to consider the material and careful crafting of the final written assessment. (Pool is a professional reviewer which of course colors her argument but I don't think she's entirely self-serving in her thinking.)

Pool has ideas for improving book reviewing as a professional activity - more considered selection of what is to be reviewed, better pay for the activity and training for those who think they might want to pursue reviewing as a vocation. She recommends a greater dependence upon paid, regular columnists. She suggests that publication editors and reviewers should take more time to discuss why a particular book should be reviewed and how much space the review should be granted. Finally, she suggests that clear editorial policies regarding ethics and practice would be of service to those who review books and the readership they serve. ( )

FAINT PRAISE was a tough book to read, for a couple of reasons. One is simply that it is simply dense with information and research on the dismal state of book reviewing and perhaps even publishing and writing in general, in America today, making it a work which requires very close reading. A bit of a slog, even. And I really wanted to know and understand what author Gail Pool had to say, so believe me, I worked at it. The other reason it was tough to read was because I love books, and I love to read a good review too. And I have observed first-hand what has happened to the book pages in newspapers and magazines over the past several years. Yes, for all of you who share my love of books and reading - it's the case of the "incredible shrinking book page."
It's sad, believe me.

I live in Michigan and subscribe to The Grand Rapids Press, and have watched the Sunday book page(s) shrink from two pages to one, to a half, and sometimes barely a quarter page, along with the ever-present NYTimes bestsellers (an increasingly disappointing list of always the same tiresome non-literary (mostly) authors, churning out the same potato-chip schlock, and non-fiction merde about whatever the latest fad or headline might be). I was also saddened and appalled when the Washington Post Book World ceased to be a separate section and many of their staff columnists and reviewers were let go (including even, I believe, Pulitzer prize-winner Michael Dirda, who continues however to contribute reviews and pieces on a fairly regular basis). I can also remember fondly my home-delivered subscription for the NY Times Book Review, also no longer a separate option for those of us in the hinterlands.

Pool, a career book reviewer and book review editor for various publications, lays out methodically all that is wrong with book reviewing in America, cutting right to the chase, starting with the explosion of new books every year (she says 150,000 new books each year, but by now I think it's closer to 200,000) and how impossible it is to cover even a small percentage of those. She talks too of how the major New York publishing houses (now mostly controlled by European conglomerates) have a stranglehold on the attention of all the major print media which feature book reviews. (Of course they do; it's all about advertising and the bottom line.) So of course the smaller publishers, independent or university presses, get short shrift from reviewers as a matter of course.

She then cites historical references to how reviewers have always been thought of, epitomized by one of her chapter headings: "Vermin, Dogs, and Woodpeckers." It's not surprising then when she dwells on the dismally low wage paid to book reviewers, a situation that has changed very little for decades. Indeed, it may have even gotten worse with the upsurge of unpaid and unskilled - not to say poorly written - reader "reviews" which now show up online at sites like Amazon and B&N by the thousands.

Pool even gives Oprah her due, but only as a "cheerleader" for books, which is certainly true, but God knows reading, books and literacy need a champion in this distracted, digital age of the sound-byte.

Although Pool attempts to make suggestions for improving the situation and providing better reviews for a better and wider selection of books, it is sadly obvious to me that most of her carefully thought out suggestions and reasonable (to lovers of books and reading) arguments will probably fall on deaf ears, if indeed they fall on any ears at all. Because, in addition to that tyrannical "bottom line" thinking propagated by the huge foreign companies that now control publishing in this country, America has already been thoroughly "dumbed down" in nearly every aspect of life. The community of discerning readers and lovers of literature and good writing continues to shrink exponentially every day. So although I applaud and agree with almost everything Pool has to say in FAINT PRAISE, I have very little hope that things will get better.

The truth is, I was very hesitant to try to "review" this book at all, because I'm one of those "self-published reviewers" she talks about that populate the online booksellers' product pages. And I will admit, with no little embarrassment, that I often rattle off a quick "review" without spending a lot of time thinking about it - reactionary rambles, you might call them. I'm not alone, of course, but that's no excuse. I characterize my "reviews" as ABE, "awkward but earnest," and I can only hope my enthusiasm for a book shows through. And yes, my reactions are largely positive. Because I know that the writer's lot in America today - like the reviewer's - is not an easy one. Why make it harder? If I don't like a book, I simply don't finish it, and certainly don't bother to review it. And this is almost without exception. I try my best to make an honest assessment of whatevery I read.

I very much appreciate Gail Pool's scholarly and incisive look at all that is wrong with book reviewing. She handled it with thoroughness, wit, and professionalism. I feel "improved" for having read it. Now if I can just work at improving what I currently call my ABE reviews. It's just that there are still so many GOOD books I want to read, and so little time. Maybe I'll somehow manage to write at least a decent, workmanlike review on occasion. I hope she'll forgive me for the sloppy ones. ( )

I very much enjoyed this book, especially the discussion about the impact of online reviews have on literary criticism. Funny, I learned about the book from a newspaper review. Good read! ( )

This is a well-written overview of the field of reviewing in the USA.

We are advised as to the problems of reviewers being obliged to review books in which they have no interest, in which they can find no redeeming features whatsoever, but on which they nevertheless feel pressured to come up with a positive judgement, and all for an extremely meagre pay.

We amateur reviewers on Amazon and other such sites are criticiszd, I admit with due reason, among other things, for our poor grammar and one-word reviews. According to Pool, many of our reviews are "ignorant and abominably written". This is very true, unfortunately.

We review gladly for no remuneration whatsoever apart from the pure joy of expressing our humble opinions. (I for one experience great satisfaction in being able to write exactly what I think, feel and want and being permitted to be totally subjective.)

However, it turns out that many authors review their own works on Amazon, promote the books of friends and "attack more prominent authors they" think "overrated", protected by their election of anonymity.

There's a chapter on the mismatching of reviewer and the book to be reviewed, i.e. the constant failure of editors to assign books to the "right" reviewers.

The author refers to George Orwell's assertion that reviewers will need to lower their standards. otherwise they will find themselves reiterating in all their reviews "This book is tripe". Editors want enthusiasm, and Pool states that "enthusiasm for the field is crucial to all reviewing". But we need the "enthusiasm of engagement, not of cheer-leading". Oprah, for instance, is "a book cheerleader", and this is what her fans have enjoyed.

One chapter discusses whether book reviews are necessary, while another deals with improving the trade.

I am no expert on book reviewing (there, I admitted it), but found this book to be articulate (if a book in itself can be so) and intensely readable. It illuminates the whole field of book reviewing from an insider's point of view. If I knew more about the field, I might have been able to be more critical, but as it is, I absolutely recommend this book to anyone interested in books and book reviewing. ( )