[Book Review] The Work of Book Reviewing

I want to improve my reading and writing skills.

I think there are some people who write on note with that kind of motivation.

When you try to write something, you need multiple skills such as how to read, how to write, how to choose, and how to engage with texts and so on.

This book carefully describes the tips for acquiring those skills.

I don't write book reviews...

Some of you might say that. However, jobs that do not require the aforementioned skills are extremely rare. This book is useful for everyone who writes.

Also, it is a very valuable book in the sense that it describes the job of a "book reviewer," which is rarely revealed, including:

・Hardships
・Joys
・Private life

I think it is a very valuable book in that sense as well.

This book is recommended for the following people:

00. About the Author

He is active as a book reviewer and writer, writing for multiple media outlets, mainly web media.

It is said that he writes as many as 40 reviews a month alone, while also writing columns and essays.

What is interesting is that he started his career as a music writer and then moved on to general magazines. He says he started his activities after receiving a request for a book review following the Lehman Shock.

It is surprising because he had never written a book review before that.

What is a book review?

What exactly is a book review?
It is described in the dictionary as follows:

The author agrees with this opinion, but points out the issue that when comparing traditional print media book reviews (= traditional reviews) with book reviews as information (= neo-reviews), the former often fail to meet their purpose.

In other words, book reviews written by prominent scholars in newspapers are often difficult to read due to complex expressions and are frequently not 'for the reader'.

To quote the author,

That may indeed be true. When comparing the readability of book reviews in print media (traditional reviews) like those on the front page of a newspaper with book reviews as information read on the internet (neo-reviews), many people would likely feel that
traditional reviews > neo-reviews
.

In fact, I have only counted a few times that I have purchased a book after reading a traditional review, but I have lost count of the number of times I have 'clicked to buy' after reading a neo-review.

Furthermore, as a point of caution for those writing neo-reviews (especially those primarily providing information), the importance of not putting yourself out there too much is mentioned.

In other words, it was stated that when writing neo-reviews aimed at disseminating information, it is important for the writer not to be too prominent.

It is true that there may be a tendency to feel a sense of security when the face of the individual disseminating the information is not visible.

Finally, the author states that the following points should be emphasized regarding what a book reviewer should be.

Is what the other party is seeking information or an opinion? It might be good to be conscious of this not only in book reviews but also when writing business documents.

Professional book reviews versus non-professional ones

Book reviews published in newspapers, magazines, and various websites are written by professionals, but there is always an editor checking the manuscript.

If there are discriminatory or extreme expressions, they will be pointed out, and it will be necessary to make corrections.

That is precisely why published book reviews have their reliability as professionals guaranteed.

However, because the internet is now developed, anyone can easily disseminate information. Of course, that in itself is a very good thing in the sense that even if you have no track record, you can become famous if you have talent.

However, the author points out that there are points to be careful about.

That is the lack of editing and proofreading functions.

Texts published by individuals do not undergo editorial review.
The author states that this point is extremely dangerous.

We must pay close attention to ensure that the texts we write do not make others feel uncomfortable or sad.

What can be gained through book reviewing

I think many people have experienced realizing their own opinions for the first time
when they talk to friends and express their own views.

Writing a book review is nothing other than expressing your own opinions in writing.

By writing a book review, you can re-recognize what you are thinking, what you are interested in, and what you are not interested in. again.

In other words, writing (not limited to book reviews) and expressing your own opinions leads to self-analysis.

The author states it like this.

For those who do not know what they want to do, why not try writing as one method of self-analysis?

There might be things that become visible.

Is the writing profession profitable?

To varying degrees, people are curious about how much income others have.

This is especially true for people whose work is not well understood. In that sense, the writing profession (including book reviewers) might be a world that is not well understood.

If you publish a book, you will receive a large amount of royalties.

Some people may have this image.

However, the author goes as far as to say that it is 'impossible'.
(Excluding popular authors and celebrities)

In many cases, the royalties received by the author are calculated as
Royalties = List Price x Number of Copies x 0.1
. (It may be lower than 0.1)

In other words, if a 1300 yen book sells 1 million copies, it is 130 million yen.

However, in reality, the first edition is about 5000 to 6000 copies, so the royalties for one book are about 650,000 yen. In other words, ordinary writers 'do not make that much money'. That was the conclusion.

However, this is just a general theory in the writing profession.
Actually, this book also touches on manuscript fees for book reviewers.
I will omit the specific numbers here, so if you are interested, please pick up this book.

Regarding the word count for book reviews

What exactly is an appropriate word count for a book review?

Taking the examples introduced in this book,
Asahi Shimbun: 800 characters
Shukan Bunshun: 1000 characters
Web: As many as you like
is what they say.

Certainly, if it is a paper-based book review, the space is limited, so you probably cannot include that much information.

On the other hand, you can write an unlimited amount on the web. In fact, there has been a tendency for web articles, including book reviews, to be better the longer they are. that was the case.

Why did such a tendency emerge?

The answer is for SEO (Search Engine Optimization) purposes.

Actually, in terms of SEO, it is judged that the longer it is, the higher the quality of the article provided. As a result, many long web articles without substance are being written.

However, the author states that he feels uncomfortable with writing long sentences.
What is important is the content, not the length.

Convinced of this, the author says he tries to never stretch something that can be finished in 3 into 10.

It seems that the tendency of readers is changing, as it is no longer the case that longer is better.the tendency of readers is changing.

And as an appropriate word count, around 3000 characters was a figure that came up.

Of course, it is a case-by-case basis, but for those writing book reviews, why not try using 3000 characters as a benchmark?

Finally

How was it? This time, I wrote a review of Atsushi Inami's "The Work of Book Reviewing".

Thank you for reading until the end.

Click here for the Amazon link to this book↓

The Kindle version is here.

Click here for other recommended articles↓