Two Interesting Web articles/posts

Two very different posts/articles have got me thinking about these internets of ours. One of them I read via my Reader, and the other in the New York Times. Both really show how technology and the internet have changed the way we work, read, and live.

First up: I really like Kassia Krozser's response at Booksquare to yet another article on how bloggers (and publishers) are ruining the book pages in the States. This is such a tiresome debate, and Kassia explains why. (Then again, Kassia could be merely reacting, instead of carefully considering context and various points of view. Just kidding.)

Now from the New York Times: "At Harvard, a Proposal to Publish Free on Web," by Patricia Cohen. Here's the upshot: "Faculty members are scheduled to vote on a measure that would permit Harvard to distribute their scholarship online, instead of signing exclusive agreements with scholarly journals that often have tiny readerships and high subscription costs."

I think this is an exciting proposal and I hope it passes. Imagine if scholarship made it to the web. There would be more room for debate and discussion. Moreover, time to "publication" could be six months instead of six years as it often is in the Humanities. While I do see issues for scholars working with human subjects or in the biological sciences, I think online scholarship is the future in the Humanities. I'll be watching the vote with great interest.

Poetry Friday Review: The Owl and the Pussycat

Celebration time! My new favorite series, Kids Can Press's Visions in Poetry, and my favorite Edward Lear poem, "The Owl and the Pussycat," meet together in one new volume. They fit together like pyjamas and a good book. Or espresso and a lemon bar. Like wasabi and soy sauce.

I've reviewed another Visions in Poetry book before--an edition of Edgar Allan Poe's The Raven. And I honestly can't go on and on enough about how wonderful this series is. Take a classic poem and pair it with compelling illustrations and you have a winner. I find that this series works best for the Middle Grade reader--one who may think she is too old for "The Owl and the Pussycat," but can't help staring at the loopy, appropriately-psychedelic illustrations by Stephane Jorisch, or too worldly-wise for The Raven, but can't turn away from Ryan Price's dark, creepy sketches. Visions in Poetry, by using new and interesting illustrations, brings poetry to every child.

This version of "The Owl and the Pussycat" begins with four two-page spreads without any words. We see a villa by the sea, complete with an owl bust in front of the house, and an urban-sophisticate cat on the subway platform at the "Owl Heights" station. The mismatched lovers share drinks together at Cafe de la gare. Tongues wag and soon the pair sets off in their "pea-green boat," watched all along by slightly-threatening monkeys, elephants, and other creatures all dressed in clothing. Soon the owl and the pussycat pass through an archway in the water and arrive to the mythical "land where the bong tree grows." Jorisch's illustrations at this point become cheerful and celebratory. The owl and the pussycat are accepted in this new land.

Today's Poetry Friday entry comes from my favorite part of "The Owl and the Pussycat," lines I love simply for their rhythm:

"Dear Pig,
are you willing
to sell for one shilling
Your ring?"
Said the Piggy,
"I will."

Go ahead. Read it aloud, just for fun.

I'll conclude this review and Poetry Friday entry with a letter. Maybe I'll even send it.

Dear Visions of Poetry editors,

I adore your series. Pretty please, can A.A. Milne's "Disobedience" (James James/Morrison Morrison/Weatherby George Dupree) be next?

Your humble reader,

Kelly
------------------------------------
Other blog reviews:

A Fuse #8
Through the Looking Glass Review
ShelfTalker

---------------
The roundup is over at Two Writing Teachers.

Speaking of reviews, there's a great debate on reviewing going on over at Gail Gauthier's Original Content. Head on over and add your two cents to the fray. (Debate inspired by Anne Boles Levy.)

Book Reviewing

Meg Rosoff explains why she only reviews books she likes in the Guardian Book Blog. She sums it up with this story:

• "A journalist friend told me about reviewing an Elmore Leonard novel negatively, then meeting the author a few months later at a literary festival. The critic found him dignified, charming, and modest, writing and speaking with as much care and professionalism at 84 as he'd done for the past 50 years. The flaws of the novel seemed suddenly insignificant, my friend told me, and he felt ashamed."

There's something about those negative reviews. I avoid them too, even if I'll mention a book I didn't like in the comments.

Reviewing

It's been a busy, busy weekend, so I haven't had time to weigh in on the reviewing question posed by Wendy at Blog from the Windowsill. The question is: to post or not to post negative reviews. Since Wendy's post, the following bloggers and writers have offered their opinions:

• Jen at Jen Robinson's Book Page
• Liz B. at A Chair, a Fireplace and a Tea Cozy
• A Fuse #8 Production
• Mary Pearson
• Colleen Mondor at Chasing Ray
• Gail Gauthier at Original Content
• Roger Sutton at Read Roger
• Esme at Planet Esme's Book-a-Day plan posted about just this question weeks ago.

Everyone has well-reasoned responses as to whether or not to post negative reviews on their blog. My reasons, however, are pragmatic and maybe false, so I'd like to get your opinions. Here's why I only post positive reviews.

1. I began this blog because I'm writing for children. I'll be sending out two novels (one strictly middle grade, another tween) this fall. I thought, if I really want to write for children, I should read as much as possible. After I began reading, I wanted to talk about my reading with others. Because I live in a small town in the middle of nearly nowhere, my interlocutors were small in number. Hence, the blog. And, in this sense, it has really fulfilled its promise. I love the dialogue and have learned so much from fellow bloggers and writers.
2. I receive and seek out many books to read. So many at this point, that I've begun sending out copies to reviewers for The Edge of the Forest, because there are too many for me to read on my own. I have a strict rule: I will read 45% of a book. If I still don't like it, I put it aside. If I haven't completed it, I can't review it. Life is short. Why read a book that doesn't "click" with you? As an example, there's one recent YA novel that ended up on many top five lists this season that I could not bear. I thought the representation of dyslexia in the novel was completely false from a scientific point of view and couldn't look past it. Was it a well written book? Yes. But, it wasn't for me.
3. Blogging is a hobby for me. I have a demanding day job, and I am not being paid to review books. I hope that my reviews are helpful to people, but it is not as if I work for a paper and have the responsibility to consider all that comes in. I review approximately four books a week (many fewer than some of my peers like A Fuse #8 Production and Bookshelves of Doom). Because I'm beholden to no one, I chose to write about the books that surprised me or entertained me or, even, transported me to another world completely.

So, for me, the only solution would be the following: Posts about what made me put down a book nearly halfway through. (I can see a series about "putdownable books.") Would that be helpful? Would that be fair to the authors of said books? Would such a series make readers more trustful of me as a reviewer? My instinct says no, but my instinct has not always been useful.

I'd love to hear your responses! Thanks to Wendy for beginning such a useful discussion.