“Serendipity!”
That was the succinct answer given by Julie Just, children’s books editor of the New York Times Book Review last Saturday, when asked how she determines just which books will be reviewed in the prestigious paper. “It could be a certain cover that you fall in love with, or recommendations from colleagues,” she said. “It could just be reading, reading, reading. But it often comes down to serendipity.”
The question arose during a panel presented by the Children’s Literary Café at the new Children’s Center at 42nd Street in New York City on March 7. Moderated by Elizabeth Bird, children’s librarian at the New York Public Library, the panel aimed to highlight issues ranging from how books are selected for review to how the reviewers themselves are selected, to the recent loss of book review space in various newspapers and the future of children’s book reviews.
Ned Vizzini, author of such young adult titles as It’s Kind of a Funny Story and Be More Chill, had his own take on how books make their way to the pages of the Book Review. “When you publish a young adult novel,” he said, “you somehow get on a special list, and boxes and boxes of books arrive at your house.” Reading through the numerous books can be time-consuming, he added, but if a book stands out from the rest, he will often pass it along to editors for possible review.) and frequent reviewer Rebecca Zerkin agreed that it is worth the extra effort it takes to find that one book for review that may receive very little exposure otherwise. “When a book is on the bestseller list,” Just said, “it doesn’t really need us.”
While wading through the piles of books can be arduous, Vizzini and Just, along with fellow panelists Leonard S. Marcus (Minders of Make-Believe: Idealists, Entrepreneurs, and the Shaping of American Children's Literature) and frequent reviewer Rebecca Zerkin agreed that it is worth the extra effort it takes to find that one book for review that may receive very little exposure otherwise. “When a book is on the bestseller list,” Just said, “it doesn’t really need us.”
Although finding an undiscovered gem may be a goal of selecting books for review, it seems that the opposite may be true when it comes to selecting the roster of reviewers. Just said she looks mainly for writing style and wit, as well as expertise in both children’s literature and the topics dealt with in the particular book chosen for review, if possible. And although she says it’s fun to take a chance on unknown writers occasionally, she feels that she almost has an obligation to the paper to go with a well-known name if it’s available, citing a recent review by journalist Cokie Roberts as an example.
Once a book and reviewer have been assigned, though, the real work begins. When asked about the process of writing a review, Marcus explained that he likes to read the selected book several times until it becomes internalized. He then identifies his personal response to the book, and in his view, the review he then writes is an attempt to explain that response.
Zerkin, who has written reviews for Parenting and other publications, said that writing reviews for the NYTBR differed significantly from her other work. “In Parenting, for example,” she said, “the goal was to point out the best children’s books and resources, whereas with the Times, it is legitimate to point out flaws.”
And although she, along with the other panelists, agreed that reviewers had to be careful to focus on the positive instead of the negative, Just also made it clear the Book Review is not there just “to give children’s books a pat on the head.” The goal of a good review, she believes, is to get people to rush out and buy the book right after finishing the review. When the review is not as favorable, that book “may be a worthy one for people to know about, but it’s just not as great as it could have been.” Just used the recent young readers edition of Three Cups of Tea as an example. Although it was a significant piece of work and appeared on the Times’s bestseller list, it did, Just believes, have some flaws.
The issue of “good” literature vs. popular literature was raised by an audience member, a librarian, who says she deals with a widening gap between the two on a daily basis. Just responded that she constantly struggles over which books will receive coveted review space. Vizzini stated the importance of keeping an open mind when perusing the bestseller list. “I never look at something,” he said, “and say because it’s popular, it can’t be good.”
Just then turned the tables on the audience, asking them if they would prefer to read more reviews of the popular books that their children and students are clamoring for, or the little-known book they may not otherwise discover. The audience responded with a solid call for “both!”
One of the critical issues on the minds of editors and readers alike in today’s economic climate is certainly the continued presence of book reviews in newspapers across the country—including the New York Times. Concern was recently raised once again when the Washington Post eliminated its stand-alone book review section. However, Just feels that incorporating book reviews, especially children’s book reviews, into the rest of the newspaper may not be such a bad thing. “People who otherwise might not read the book reviews may be more likely to come across them,” she said.
With the NYTBR remaining as the country’s most prominent stand-alone book review section among daily papers, there is certainly fear among readers that the paper may follow the example of the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times, which eliminated its separate book review section in 2007. Just said that the space she has for her reviews certainly isn’t going up any time soon, but she hopes that it also won’t be going down.
Vizzini believes that the current situation says much more about the newspaper industry than the lack of quality book reviews, many of which can be found online. He reminded the audience that “the book industry has been dying for 500 years, and we’re still here.”
