Opinion - News Analysis

Of books, authors and bibliophiles

The trigger for a study of how books are handled in The Hindu for review was a letter from reader A.S. Raman of Anna Nagar, Chennai. On December 19, 2006, the paper had published a review of a bilingual book, “Thiruvachakam 221;. Mr. Raman wrote to the publishers, Sowo Religious Guild, Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu, for copies of the book. That, he was told, was published on July 30, 2004, and the 1,000 copies printed had all been distributed to donors. It was no longer available.

The delay of over two years in reviewing the book was inexplicable, the reader said. That in any case he would not have been able to get the book — which was given to pre-publication donors and to select libraries, colleges, universities and temples — is beside the point. I was told that the original review of the book, stored in the computer, got erased. This was discovered later, and since it was a noteworthy publication, a fresh review was commissioned.

A long time gap is a built-in factor in book reviews. There are delays at every stage — despatch of the book by the publisher, scanning the titles and selecting books for review, delivery to the reviewer, receipt of the review, scheduling for publication, and actual publication.

For purposes of review, books are categorised as fiction and non-fiction. The Tuesday “Book Review” page deals only with non-fiction (an exception is made for books in languages other than English), while fiction is slotted for the monthly Literary Review. The Tuesday section receives over 4,500 books a year. Six or seven books are reviewed every week (two or three of them non-English).

How is the selection made? The main consideration is the content and its importance. The name of the author does influence the choice. The quality of production is also a factor. The emphasis is on Indian publications. There are instances where the writers themselves are the publishers. Some consideration is given to such efforts. An increasing trend recently has been edited collections of papers and writings. Caution is exercised in picking up such publications.

A list of the selected books and suggested reviewers — prepared by the team in charge — is seen and cleared by the Editor-in-Chief. Where sensitive issues and political subjects form the theme, the work is generally assigned to staff members who are familiar with the paper’s approach and are unlikely to be prejudiced. Similarly, when the reviews contain controversial statements, that, in some cases, might involve legal risk, clearance at the top level is sought.

With the severe limitations on space, a large number of books received are listed under “New Arrivals”. Some interesting books occasionally get a brief note based on the blurb. Even for “New Arrivals”, a selection needs to be made. Only original works are listed. School or college textbooks and guides, reprints, compilations and so on, do not make it to the review pages. Books relating to education are sent to EducationPlus for notice if warranted. A complete list of all the books received is maintained by the library.

The choice of reviewers is made from a panel. The list keeps changing. When the quality of writing is unsatisfactory or prejudices are seen, the reviewer is dropped from the panel. Additions to the panel are made based on suggestions from dependable sources. When a person makes a request for inclusion, the credentials are examined and sample reviews are commissioned for assessment.

Word limits are set for the writings. The main reviews are generally 800-900 words in length. Where the importance of the book warrants it, this can go up to 1,000. (On occasion, longer reviews or review-based articles find place on the editorial or Op-Ed pages.) For non-English books, the word limit is 250-300. The reviewers have their own pace and sometimes need to be gently prodded to finish their work. The writings need careful scrutiny and sometimes heavy editing. It happens on a few occasions that a reviewer is knowledgeable about the subject but the writing needs to be salvaged by editing. When required, the edited (or rewritten) pieces are referred back to the writer for approval.

What sort of pressures does the desk face? Not from the publishers, but occasionally from the authors who are keen to know when the reviews will appear, or who the reviewer is. There have been instances of a reviewer mentioning his work and facing pressures from the author. Unsolicited reviews are not considered. Nor rejoinders to published reviews as a rule. (Publishers are known to send books to persons chosen by them. The firm policy of The Hindu is to send books out to reviewer s it chooses, not someone else.)

Generally, reviews for two to three weeks are in hand. There are occasions when a topical book or one in the news is reviewed very quickly, displacing a review scheduled for publication.

The monthly Literary Review deals with fiction, biography, poetry, and so on. Almost all the books are received in Delhi and the selection for notice is made in Delhi and Chennai, working in coordination. About ten books get reviewed every month; three or four get noticed briefly in “From the Blurb.” But this supplement goes beyond book reviews. There are regular columns that analyse trends in language, literature, writing and publishing; interviews; book extracts and much more.

This account of the processes, and problems and challenges involved in handling book reviews should answer the reader’s query on delays, which started off this column.

But I have my own queries. Why this fixation with Tuesday? It appears to me to be a hangover of the days when there was a Tuesday pullout carrying Open Page, Education, and Book Review. I would opt for a merger of the monthly Literary Review and the Tuesday pages, and offering them as a weekly tabloid (for easier handling) Literary Review in colour.

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu