irish writers union

Irish Writers’ Union
Code of Practice for Reviewing

Preamble

Book reviews in newspapers or magazines, on radio or television, have a major influence on the success or failure of a book. Reviews and reviewing should therefore be approached with the utmost seriousness.

A review is effective only within a short period after the publication of the book. Every effort should be made by everyone involved to ensure that the review is published promptly.

Writing is the premier art form of this country and the Irish-based publishing industry has rapidly been gaining an increased readership for Irish-published books, Newspapers and other media must bear in mind their responsibility to writers and to the Irish publishing industry when deciding the proportions of Irish against foreign books reviewed.

This code of practice is not intended to curb the flair, originality, or wit, of the reviewer, but to establish a basic level of professionalism in the reviewing area.

For Literary Editors

You should ensure that all books received for reviewing are despatched to the reviewer without delay. A record of books received, the reviewer appointed, and the deadline assigned to the reviewer should be kept so that, if a review is not received, appropriate action can be taken.

You should ensure that the book is reviewed by a reviewer who has special competence in the field of literature to which the book belongs.

If a review is submitted which is in breach of this code of practice you should not publish it; but return it to the reviewer with a precise explanation as to why it is unacceptable.

In allocating review space as between books by Irish writers and books by writers from abroad, you should bear in mind your special responsibility to Irish writers and publishers.

Any reviewer who supplies a review which he or she has been requested to do should be paid for that review whether it is published or not.

For Reviewers

Bearing in mind the importance of a prompt review, you should adhere to the deadline given.

If you are not interested in reviewing a particular book you have received, or if you are unable to do the review immediately, due to pressure on your time or other reasons, you should return the book forthwith to the Literary Editor so that another reviewer can be appointed.

If you receive a book by a close friend, or by an enemy, you should not review it without first discussing it with the Literary Editor.

If your personal feelings towards an author or towards his or her work are likely to affect the objectivity of your review, you should definitely decline to review the book.

You should never make a sarcastic comment, nor ridicule a book. It is undoubtedly the outcome of a considerable work and should be treated with respect, regardless of whether the review is positive or negative, Always bear in mind that your opinion may not be the final one and that history may judge the book differently from you.

Always be careful not to undermine the reader’s enjoyment of the book, by an over-detailed account, or by revealing the denouement of a plot.

You must avoid using the book review as a platform for making your own statement on a particular subject. This is unfair to the author, and in any case is unnecessary, since your knowledge of the subject will become apparent in the course of the review.

Practical Guidelines for Reviewers

The following suggestions have been adapted from the document which was always sent out to reviewers by the Los Angeles Times. This material was kindly supplied by Jack Miles, the Book Editor.

1. Copy Deadline.
Deadlines are firm. If you cannot meet the assigned deadline, you must notify the Book Editor as soon as possible.

2. Preparation of Copy
Typewritten, double-spaced if possible, with wide margins at top and bottom.

Start your review with the following information:
Title, including sub-title.
Author and/or editor, translator, illustrator, photographer as applicable.
Publisher: Price, binding (cloth or paper); pages illustrated (if applicable);
ISBN (the 13-digit number on the copyright page).

Give the full forms of all names; e.g. ‘Faber & Faber’ not ‘Faber’. Information about such matters as pages and illustrations will often be found more fully in the release that accompanies a new book or set of proofs than on the title page itself. Note that paper or simultaneous cloth/paper format is always to be indicated.

3. Headline.
Below the publishing information and above the text, suggest a headline of about five words. This may or may not be used, at the discretion of the editor.

4. Tagline.
At the end of your review supply a line of identification about yourself. Fit the identification with the subject matter of the review where appropriate: e.g. for a book on Russia, ‘Murphy was, for three years, Russian Correspondent for the Irish Times.' Otherwise, a publication credit is welcome: e.g. ‘Murphy is the translator of the complete works of Turgenev (Gill & MacMillan).’
An affiliation credit is the third choice: e.g. ‘Murphy teaches Russian history at St. Patrick’s College, Mayhnooth.’
Least interesting, though sometimes inescapable, is ‘Murphy is a freelance writer and critic.’

Be brief. Don’t be facetious. Be as specific as possible. Rather than ‘Murphy is a novelist,’ say ‘Murphy’s most recent novel is ‘Groans (Faber & Faber).’

In your own interest, never omit your publisher.

5. Other points to note.
Be careful about attributing potentially libellous statements. Always use some such words as: ‘According to the author…’ or ‘in the author’s opinion…’
The reader must at all times be able to distinguish between facts presented by the book and summarised by you and your own conclusions about the book or its subject matter. Titles of books should appear in quotation marks. Do not underline titles nor use capitals.
Make frequent paragraph breaks.
Include page numbers in parenthesis after any words you quote from the book under review.

6. General Requirements
Two items, clearly, are essential in a book review, no matter how short.

(a) What the book is about.
Reviewers should make it clear whether a book is fiction or non-fiction, whether it is a translation, what is the author’s relationship to his subject matter, whether the author is a beginner or an established writer. Basics of this sort can best be handled in passing and are what makes a review responsible. The best reviews are written when the reviewer has an independent knowledge of the subject matter. The richer the knowledge, the more convincing the review is likely to be. It may be desirable, for instance, to look at a novelist’s earlier novels or consult a different historian on the same subject. A good book review should resemble a short article on the subject.

(b) What the reviewer thinks about the book.
A reviewer should evaluate a book on its own terms, not on the terms on which he or she thinks it should have been written.

Particular care should be taken in reviewing poetry, because of its personal nature. It is essential to try to enter into the spirit of the work in order to understand the poet’s intentions.

However, the reviewer is entitled to mention that the book has not come up to the general standard expected in its field.

If you dislike a book you must provide evidence for your view. One way to do this is to quote from it as honestly and as skilfully as you can. Besides providing evidence for your claims, quoted words inevitably have great power.

Another way is to describe your complaint specifically, e.g. inaccuracy of detail, repetiveness, poor style or syntax.

The reader of your review may decide that he or she does not agree with you, and may like the book.

If you like the book, make sure to provide a line of a phrase that says so plainly. It is not easy to praise well.

Again, you can achieve a great deal by being specific and by quotations or references to passages that particularly pleased you.

If you are reviewing several books together, do not devote the space to those that interest you.

Never tell the whole story of a novel. The author has probably built up tension and complication with the object of making a denouement at the right moment. You can destroy this and prevent the book from being read, simply by telling too much.

7. Finally.
Be sure to keep a copy of your review, and to check that it has safely arrived at its destination.

© Irish Writers’ Union 2008
oOo

home aims benefits committee events faq honoured plunkett join links contract membersites news plr reviewing tax

	Irish Writers Union Chomhar na Scribhneoiri	*Code of Practice for Reviewing*
This is the website of the Irish Writers' Union, 19 Parnell Square, Dublin 1. 01-872 13 02. or email The website is edited by Brendan Nolan	Irish Writers’ Union Code of Practice for Reviewing Preamble Book reviews in newspapers or magazines, on radio or television, have a major influence on the success or failure of a book. Reviews and reviewing should therefore be approached with the utmost seriousness. A review is effective only within a short period after the publication of the book. Every effort should be made by everyone involved to ensure that the review is published promptly. Writing is the premier art form of this country and the Irish-based publishing industry has rapidly been gaining an increased readership for Irish-published books, Newspapers and other media must bear in mind their responsibility to writers and to the Irish publishing industry when deciding the proportions of Irish against foreign books reviewed. This code of practice is not intended to curb the flair, originality, or wit, of the reviewer, but to establish a basic level of professionalism in the reviewing area. For Literary Editors You should ensure that all books received for reviewing are despatched to the reviewer without delay. A record of books received, the reviewer appointed, and the deadline assigned to the reviewer should be kept so that, if a review is not received, appropriate action can be taken. You should ensure that the book is reviewed by a reviewer who has special competence in the field of literature to which the book belongs. If a review is submitted which is in breach of this code of practice you should not publish it; but return it to the reviewer with a precise explanation as to why it is unacceptable. In allocating review space as between books by Irish writers and books by writers from abroad, you should bear in mind your special responsibility to Irish writers and publishers. Any reviewer who supplies a review which he or she has been requested to do should be paid for that review whether it is published or not. For Reviewers Bearing in mind the importance of a prompt review, you should adhere to the deadline given. If you are not interested in reviewing a particular book you have received, or if you are unable to do the review immediately, due to pressure on your time or other reasons, you should return the book forthwith to the Literary Editor so that another reviewer can be appointed. If you receive a book by a close friend, or by an enemy, you should not review it without first discussing it with the Literary Editor. If your personal feelings towards an author or towards his or her work are likely to affect the objectivity of your review, you should definitely decline to review the book. You should never make a sarcastic comment, nor ridicule a book. It is undoubtedly the outcome of a considerable work and should be treated with respect, regardless of whether the review is positive or negative, Always bear in mind that your opinion may not be the final one and that history may judge the book differently from you. Always be careful not to undermine the reader’s enjoyment of the book, by an over-detailed account, or by revealing the denouement of a plot. You must avoid using the book review as a platform for making your own statement on a particular subject. This is unfair to the author, and in any case is unnecessary, since your knowledge of the subject will become apparent in the course of the review. Practical Guidelines for Reviewers The following suggestions have been adapted from the document which was always sent out to reviewers by the Los Angeles Times. This material was kindly supplied by Jack Miles, the Book Editor. 1. Copy Deadline. Deadlines are firm. If you cannot meet the assigned deadline, you must notify the Book Editor as soon as possible. 2. Preparation of Copy Typewritten, double-spaced if possible, with wide margins at top and bottom. Start your review with the following information: Title, including sub-title. Author and/or editor, translator, illustrator, photographer as applicable. Publisher: Price, binding (cloth or paper); pages illustrated (if applicable); ISBN (the 13-digit number on the copyright page). Give the full forms of all names; e.g. ‘Faber & Faber’ not ‘Faber’. Information about such matters as pages and illustrations will often be found more fully in the release that accompanies a new book or set of proofs than on the title page itself. Note that paper or simultaneous cloth/paper format is always to be indicated. 3. Headline. Below the publishing information and above the text, suggest a headline of about five words. This may or may not be used, at the discretion of the editor. 4. Tagline. At the end of your review supply a line of identification about yourself. Fit the identification with the subject matter of the review where appropriate: e.g. for a book on Russia, ‘Murphy was, for three years, Russian Correspondent for the Irish Times.' Otherwise, a publication credit is welcome: e.g. ‘Murphy is the translator of the complete works of Turgenev (Gill & MacMillan).’ An affiliation credit is the third choice: e.g. ‘Murphy teaches Russian history at St. Patrick’s College, Mayhnooth.’ Least interesting, though sometimes inescapable, is ‘Murphy is a freelance writer and critic.’ Be brief. Don’t be facetious. Be as specific as possible. Rather than ‘Murphy is a novelist,’ say ‘Murphy’s most recent novel is ‘Groans (Faber & Faber).’ In your own interest, never omit your publisher. 5. Other points to note. Be careful about attributing potentially libellous statements. Always use some such words as: ‘According to the author…’ or ‘in the author’s opinion…’ The reader must at all times be able to distinguish between facts presented by the book and summarised by you and your own conclusions about the book or its subject matter. Titles of books should appear in quotation marks. Do not underline titles nor use capitals. Make frequent paragraph breaks. Include page numbers in parenthesis after any words you quote from the book under review. 6. General Requirements Two items, clearly, are essential in a book review, no matter how short. (a) What the book is about. Reviewers should make it clear whether a book is fiction or non-fiction, whether it is a translation, what is the author’s relationship to his subject matter, whether the author is a beginner or an established writer. Basics of this sort can best be handled in passing and are what makes a review responsible. The best reviews are written when the reviewer has an independent knowledge of the subject matter. The richer the knowledge, the more convincing the review is likely to be. It may be desirable, for instance, to look at a novelist’s earlier novels or consult a different historian on the same subject. A good book review should resemble a short article on the subject. (b) What the reviewer thinks about the book. A reviewer should evaluate a book on its own terms, not on the terms on which he or she thinks it should have been written. Particular care should be taken in reviewing poetry, because of its personal nature. It is essential to try to enter into the spirit of the work in order to understand the poet’s intentions. However, the reviewer is entitled to mention that the book has not come up to the general standard expected in its field. If you dislike a book you must provide evidence for your view. One way to do this is to quote from it as honestly and as skilfully as you can. Besides providing evidence for your claims, quoted words inevitably have great power. Another way is to describe your complaint specifically, e.g. inaccuracy of detail, repetiveness, poor style or syntax. The reader of your review may decide that he or she does not agree with you, and may like the book. If you like the book, make sure to provide a line of a phrase that says so plainly. It is not easy to praise well. Again, you can achieve a great deal by being specific and by quotations or references to passages that particularly pleased you. If you are reviewing several books together, do not devote the space to those that interest you. Never tell the whole story of a novel. The author has probably built up tension and complication with the object of making a denouement at the right moment. You can destroy this and prevent the book from being read, simply by telling too much. 7. Finally. Be sure to keep a copy of your review, and to check that it has safely arrived at its destination. © Irish Writers’ Union 2008 oOo home aims benefits committee events faq honoured plunkett join links contract membersites news plr reviewing tax
top of page	email: Irish Writers' Union here	48