Welcome to Event B at the Appositions 2009 conference, a forum for conversation about the topic of book reviewing in the digital age: practice/politics/pedagogy.
If you would like to participate, simply add your contribution here via the “post a comment” link at the bottom of this page.
Administrative and editorial policies vary considerably from journal to journal (in print media) when it comes to how book reviews are managed from inquiry to process to production. Some journals (including RES) routinely send their book reviews out for peer-review; others (such as RQ) commission reviews; while other journals (like RELARTS) openly invite proposals for books to be reviewed.
A small number of those postings to Milton-L defended a conservative model: that, in most cases, bad books should be ignored; that reviews ought to be written by an inner-circle of established scholars; and that solicited book reviews should not be subject to peer-review.
How and why might electronic journals in the field solicit, evaluate, and produce book reviews of value? How and why might e-journals promote book reviews as vehicles for building new communities that either sustain or subvert the status quo?
We invite your comments, questions and statements toward a collaborative document on editorial and scholarly best practices for book reviewing in the digital age.
APPOSITIONS: Studies in Renaissance / Early Modern Literature & Culture, http://appositions.blogspot.com/, ISSN: 1946-1992, Volume Two (2009): Dialogues & Exchanges