Page:Annual Report of the American Historical Association.pdf/134



When I was invited to prepare a brief paper on book reviewing, it at once occurred to me that such a paper might well be entitled "How to review books, by one who never wrote any." I prefer not to dwell on the circumstances which make this title personally fitting; the more so as, in one sense, it is perhaps not inappropriate that the present discussion should be opened by one who is more familiar with reviewing than with authorship. The point I have in mind may be well brought out by relating a personal experience. Some years ago there fell into my hands, for purposes of review, a book of some pretensions, which unfortunately turned out to be largely pretentious. Shortly after the review was printed there came an anonymous communication inclosing clippings from any number of high-class journals, such as the Kansas City Star and the Boston Transcript, all of which had given the book a good character. The clippings had been pasted on a sheet of note paper, and underneath were written, very neatly, these words: "Big men write books; little men review them." The particular example which had so obviously inspired this crisp epigram I naturally thought to be unfortunately chosen; but I have often wondered whether the epigram itself, abstractly considered, is not truer than we like to suppose.

And yet, with all due respect to these eminent persons, I imagine the result would be much the same even if the big men wrote all the reviews as well as all the books; for, although the reproach of my friend is probably less apropos in foreign countries than it is here, I do not see that the reviews, in the Revue Historique for example, are very different from those in American journals; a little more effectively executed perhaps—hitting the mark a little more surely when the book has merit, less weakly amiable when it has none—but still of the same general type. Now if this type is what we want, there is nothing more to be said. The quality of our reviews is good enough, but it is just possible that their character, which is much the same everywhere, leaves something to be desired. Supposing this to be the case, it may not be amiss to ask what, essentially is the character of the typical historical book review.

Book reviewing is a term of variable significance. It may be defined as a species of writing which ranges from bibliography on the 129