Read on Twitter
Right, I did a poll, and people said they might be interested in this, so here goes: A THREAD on how telegraph poetry book of the month reviews work. [1]
I try to keep an up-to-date list of every eligible book for Poetry Book of the Month (let& #39;s call it PBotM to save characters). [2]
& #39;Eligible& #39; here means a book of new poems by a poet writing mainly in the English language published in the UK in the calendar month before the review is published.
i.e. no pamphlets, selecteds, collecteds, anthologies, translations, reissues or anthologies [3]
i.e. no pamphlets, selecteds, collecteds, anthologies, translations, reissues or anthologies [3]
Every month I try to read at least some of every PBotM-eligible book I know about. I don& #39;t always finish all of them, but I try to read as much as possible. [4]
If you are publishing PBotM-eligible books, and you would like them to be considered, please do these two things: [5]
Thing one: send me a list of the eligible books you are publishing in 2020, with their publication dates. This is *enormously* helpful for planning ahead.
Thing two: send books! As long as I get them at least 4 weeks ahead of publication, I promise I& #39;ll give them a try. [6]
Thing two: send books! As long as I get them at least 4 weeks ahead of publication, I promise I& #39;ll give them a try. [6]
I prefer physical copies, but I am OK with PDFs - particularly from small presses who don& #39;t have a budget for free physical review copies. [7]
If you are a publisher and you not sure how to send me copies, tweet me and I will DM you! (If you& #39;re an author, please ask your publisher to do this, rather than getting in touch yourself. It& #39;s easier, as I can talk to them about review copies for all their titles at once.) [8]
I& #39;ve been in touch with 33 poetry publishers this year about Telegraph coverage. With around half of them, it& #39;s been a case of me reaching out to them. But I don& #39;t have time to chase up everyone, and I& #39;m sure there are lots of publishers I don& #39;t even know about. [9]
If you send an eligible book a decent amount of time before its publication, I promise I& #39;ll give it a go. But I can& #39;t review a book if I don& #39;t know it exists. [10]
There are a great many publishers in the UK, but you can count the number of people regularly writing about poetry in broadsheets on your fingers. If you are a small poetry publisher, contact them! It& #39;s easier for you to find them than it is for them to find you. [11]
So that& #39;s how books get on The List. Once they& #39;re on the list, I read them. For this April, I ended up with a list of 18 eligible books: I finished 14, and read a decent chunk of 5 others. [12]
I then come up with a smaller list of likely PBotM contenders (usually 2-5 books), and read them a second time. If I were a better critic, I& #39;d then choose the best one straight away and review it. [13]
But because I am woolly and indecisive, I then usually go back and forth for several days, phone a poetry-agnostic friend and talk at them about various books they& #39;ve never heard of and will never read, rant at other friends on WhatsApp about why choosing is hard, etc... [14]
... and then waffling to them about possible meanings of poems they haven& #39;t read and don& #39;t care about. This process can look something like this: [15]
![... and then waffling to them about possible meanings of poems they haven& #39;t read and don& #39;t care about. This process can look something like this: [15]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EXqx9jCXsAEkJrl.png "... and then waffling to them about possible meanings of poems they haven& #39;t read and don& #39;t care about. This process can look something like this: [15]")
(A moment& #39;s silence, please, for my poor long-suffering friends.) [16]
I try to pick the book which, subjectively, *for me*, has been the most interesting and enjoyable book that month. I don& #39;t really trust the idea of objective criticism. [17]
I& #39;d never choose something that left me entirely cold on the basis that it& #39;s somehow *objectively* good, and would appeal to readers other than me. A better, more sensitive or mature critic, might do this, but I can& #39;t. [18]
This is because I fear that kind of second-guessing could lead to overpraising something poetry-shaped and plausible-seeming over something that& #39;s actually ALIVE and can mean something to people. "Huh, this is doing all the things poetry should do, so I guess it& #39;s good?" No. [19]
The only thing I can offer is my subjective, personal response as a slightly-slower-than-average reader trying his best. That& #39;s all I& #39;ve got. So I try to offer that response as honestly as possible. [20]
A side-note on subjective criticism: there can be upsides to a publication having a very small number of critics reviewing things very frequently. It gives readers a chance to get to know each critic& #39;s tastes and gauge their own likely reaction accordingly. [21]
Stephanie Zacharek & Robbie Collin are 2 of my favourite film critics, but I& #39;m more likely to try a film on Zacharek& #39;s recommendation as her tastes are closer to mine. We& #39;ve never met, but in a way I feel like I know her through her writing; this is one thing critics can do. [22]
ANYWAY. Once I& #39;ve picked a book, I email my editor to let them know which book I& #39;m reviewing, and check whether it& #39;ll run in the print edition or online only. (Word counts are more flexible online, and often quite tight for print.) [23]
I then read the book again, making pencil notes in the margins and/or on post-its. (If I& #39;d read it as a PDF before, I print it out to do this.) Then I go through it *again* and type up these notes, and use them as the starting point for a review. [24]
As I& #39;m writing for a general-interest publication, rather than an academic journal or specialist poetry magazine, I try to avoid using jargon or assuming specialist knowledge. *Particularly* if it& #39;s running in print. They might have only opened that supplement for the quiz. [25]
(Incidentally, the weekly books quiz, by Henry Eliot, is brilliant.) I try to make sure *any* newspaper review of any artform is comprehensible, entertaining and interesting to someone who normally takes no interest in that artform. [26]
I& #39;m very lucky in that I& #39;m allowed a completely free choice for PBotM reviews: I just choose the book that& #39;s excited me most. It might be a weird Marmite book that not many readers would enjoy, but so long as the *review* is a piece of writing they enjoy, that& #39;s OK. [27]
Sometimes, if a poetry book is considered very newsworthy (a Simon Armitage book published the same week he was announced as the new laureate), it will *also* get a review. But the PBotM is just the book that excited me most, whoever it& #39;s by. [28]
One last thought to wrap up this absurdly long and self-indulgent thread: if you like poetry reviews, please click on the reviews. Read them. Leave comments underneath. If you& #39;re considering subscribing to a paywalled site, click the & #39;subscribe& #39; button on a poetry article. [29]
Media outlets keep track of which articles get clicks, comments, subscriptions, etc. If you demonstrate that you are interested in reading about poetry, they& #39;re more likely to commission more writing about poetry: readers influence what gets covered. [30]
