Reading the book is, like, so 2008

I'd like to thank Entertainment Weekly for undoing the work of lots of great book reviewers out there in their review of Catching Fire. Concerning this review, EW's incompetency is simply astounding.

Honestly, I don't care that EW gave the book a "C." The letter grades that EW assigns books, movies, and music are really more a ballpark estimate to me than anything else. What ticks me off is that the reviewer doesn't appear to have read The Hunger Games OR Catching Fire, yet complains that the book lacks "the erotic energy that makes Twilight, for instance, so creepily alluring." (I wish I could make that up. I'm a little skeeved out just reading it.)

Really, EW? That was low. It's a comparison of apples and pineapples. Catching Fire isn't meant to have erotic energy. It's a post-apocalyptic adventure. It's not meant to be "creepily alluring." I'm willing to bet that the reviewer, Jennifer Reese, has never read a YA novel other than TSVB. Of course, she doesnt need to, because TSVB is representative of the entire genre, right? I mean, according to her review standards, I can give Julie and Julia the same letter grade/review that I give Methland because they're both memoirs, right? And I can say that Methland is an inferior book because it's not happy and about food, yes?

I'm all for comparing similar books in a review. That's good reader's advisory and it's an essential part of developing a book's marketing plan. What brings down the quality of a review is expecting one book to be representative of an entire genre, as EW has done, and complaining when books in that genre aren't all the same. It's not fair for to give Catching Fire a bad review because it's not what Ms Reese wanted it to be. You might as well get mad at a pair of pumps for not being a pair of Wellington boots.

Now I need to go shoe shopping.

What should I listen to? (the 2009 review project)

In just two months, I will cease reviewing YA novels in this blog for a year due to serving on the 2010 Printz. I've hired two absolutely outstanding guest bloggers to fill in, so I guarantee you will have your regular dose of YA literature, but I was thinking about the things that I would like to review here.

Picture books are out. I greatly enjoy them but I know absolutely nothing about art. I can barely tell an oil from a watercolor. Light and perspective befuddle me. I haven't taken an art class since sixth grade, and I barely made it through elementary school art with passing grades.

Middle grade books? I love MG books and have only recently discovered the wonder that is Polly Horvath. I wish her books had been around when I was a kid. I was exactly that kind of quirky girl reader who would have loved them. But the thing with MG is that some of it crosses into the YA realm. The age range for the Printz is 12-18, not 14-18, meaning that all those "ages 9-12" books can be nominated. This being the case, I would rather err on the side of book review caution.

Adult books? Maybe. But they're awfully long.

I know.

MUSIC.

Here's my new goal for 2009: I would like to listen to and do short reviews of at least 50 albums between January 1 and December 31. I think that's doable, just given the time I spend either running or driving or on public transportation. Here are my personal rules:

1. It must be an album I've never heard before in full. If I've heard one or two songs from an album, that's okay.

2. I'd like to review at least 20 albums during the year by bands I've never listened to before. These can be bands from any decade.

These seem like silly rules for most people, but most people aren't Dean Winchester in a librarian's body. As I've mentioned before, I love classic rock and have no qualms about listening to Back in Black once a week or so. Listening to the same five albums over and over doesn't bother me. Unfortunately, it's gotten me in sort of a rut.

I'm Carlie, and I'm your new reader's advisory project.

I really like...: Classic rock, hard rock, and metal make up most of my music library. AC/DC, Rush, Metallica, Led Zeppelin, Seether, Shinedown, Velvet Revolver, Nirvana, GnR, Foo Fighters, the Stones, Alter Bridge, the Who, Black Sabbath, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Staind, Blue Oyster Cult, Aerosmith, Disturbed

You may also be surprised to learn that I am a fan of...: Tori Amos, Avril Lavigne, Mannheim Steamroller, Dashboard Confessional, Death Cab for Cutie, Mary J. Blige, Justin Timberlake, Fall Out Boy, Lily Allen

If you recommend the following, I probably won't like it based on past experience: Rap save for a little Eminem here and there, R&B, country, blues, jazz, much emo. I've tried to like Belle and Sebastian, Joanna Newsom, Sunny Day Real Estate, and Regina Spektor and not succeded.

Oh, and I can't stand the Eagles or Pink Floyd.

So, recommend away! I'm also taking suggestions for favorite music recommendation sites. I like Pandora a lot but I'm up for more options.

iTunes, here I come.

Which is more important, professional reviews or teen reviews?

Anonymously, I take a lot of crap. You see, I am a member of one of the most hated groups in children's publishing: I review for Kirkus. As a reviewer for Kirkus, I have been told in indirect terms that I am a moron, that I didn't "get" the point of a book, that I am cruel and harsh and it doesn't matter what I think, anyway, because I'm just a dumb adult and the really important reviews come from teens.

I swear, if I see one more author blog about how it's teen reviews that really matter and professional reviews, especially from Kirkus, are of little consequence, I'm going to throw something. Here's why:

What librarians know very, very well and what too many authors seem to miss is the question of how those books get into teens' hands in the first place. If teens want books, they have three options, more or less: a brick-and-mortar bookstore, the library, or Amazon/other online retailer. Now, Amazon is a different sort of beast than a bookstore or library. They can and do carry just about everything, and a customer can decide if she wants to buy a book based not just on professional reviews, but user reviews as well. Of course, one has to wait until the book is widely available to get those reviews. The biggest difference between online retailers and concrete institutions is the amount of space available to house books. No bookstore or library has unlimited amounts of space or money to purchase books, and that's where professional reviews come in. Because I have never worked in a bookstore, I'll talk about the value of professional reviews to libraries, and how (or how not) teen reviews matter.

Like most librarians, I'm used to buying books for a collection on a tight budget. In order to make the most of what little money I have to spend, I cannot justify buying a book if I can't answer "Yes" to the question: Is this book going to circulate? The answer to that question is different for every book in every library. I know of libraries where Gossip Girl sits on the shelf and collects dust. In order to decide if a book sounds like a good fit for my collection, I have to read its reviews. I have decided not to buy more than one book based on its marginal reviews. Thing is, I can't wait for all those books to be out long enough to garner multiple customer reviews on Amazon. In order to keep patrons happy, I need to have the newest books on the shelf as close to their street date as possible. After all, that's only good customer service. If I'm getting information about books prior to their release, I want those reviews to come from people whose judgment I trust. Those people I trust would be my colleagues, fellow industry professionals who work with teens and can evaluate a book for quality and popularity. The short version: If a book doesn't get good reviews in the professional journals, its chances of actually making it into a teen's hands are decreased because a book with bad reviews where the author is not already a big name is less likely to be purchased for a library's shelf. So in this case, professional reviews matter way more than teen reviews. It's true that I've bought books with bad reviews because I knew they were going to be popular, but that has more to do with serving my library's population than who the important reviewers are.

Do adult reviewers read books differently than teens? Heck yeah. Does this mean their reviews count for less? NO. It's just a different perspective. Not all reviewers agree on all books. Look at reviews for books like Wicked Lovely and King Dork. To say those reviews are mixed among the professional journals is an understatement. In cases like these, I read as many reviews as possible and see if the book is a good fit for my population.

I don't think teen reviews of books are a bad thing. Far from it. Stellar reviews from teens means that a book is speaking to its intended audience. But authors, please do not discount the importance of reviews by us grownups. We're a big part of the reason you get teen reviews in the first place.

(Now, the author who complained that the reason Kirkus gave his book a bad review was because s/he was reviewing from a galley is another post altogether, starting with the fact that Kirkus's reviews have to be in 2 months prior to the street date of the book...)