Every day I receive scores of requests to review books of various kinds. I consider them all very seriously. It’s not because I think that my review, or any others other than the New York Times, would be especially influential or consequential, but I figure that if someone has spent time, sometimes substantial, in writing a book, the author deserves more than a cursory or dismissive evaluation.
Through the years, I have developed some criteria that I apply in reviewing books or selecting books to be reviewed:
1. Length: This applies both to the review and the book. A single paragraph review is either a useless love letter or a poisonous insult. A real review addresses, at the very least, the book’s theme and how successful the author has been in enlisting dialogue, environmental description, and other literary devices to present it successfully. This takes time and space. I think a well considered review should be at least 400 words.
As for the length of the book, I confess to irrationality. I do not review books longer than 300 pages; I simply don’t have the time. I say irrationality because some of my favorite books are much longer.
2. Theme: I favor books grounded in reality. Therefore, I tend not to review books filled with phantoms and/or extraterrestrial landscapes. On the other hand, I like the reality to be heightened, featuring high degrees of conflict and intensity.
3. I analyze books in terms of their “body” parts—skeleton (theme and story), organs (characters), and skin (language). Ideally, a book tells a compelling story, populated by dramatically distinct characters, and presented with the imaginative use of simile, metaphor, and a rich mix of sentence structures.