An ongoing consideration at AAR is whether or not it’s worth doing more than one review per book. Typically, we have a list of books reviewers can choose from and one reviewer picks a book and reviews it. Sometimes, if there’s a lot of interest in a release, we do a Pandora’s Box where reviewers discuss a book. However, I’m interested in greenlighting more dual reviews for two reasons. One, I want reviewers to review books that they’re excited about. Two, as cultural critics have begun to look, openly, at books for how appropriate they are–a values’ based judgement–as well as the technical merits of a book, I want to make sure that our views on books are as expansive as our readership.
I, however, could be wrong.
What do you think? Do you like more than one review? Do you feel that AAR is covering books in a way that feels appropriate to you? Let us know.