Based on the Cover, What Did You Expect? A Lesson from Man of Fire
Look at the subtitle of this book for me for a moment, please:
Based on that subtitle, what would you assume the book is about?
So, you might imagine my consternation when a recent reviewer said, “Like most Sherman biographies, the general’s post-war life is not as well documented as the rest of his life.”
Um…I’m pretty sure we advertised, right up front, what the book would cover, right? Am I missing something there?
I try not to take too much issue with reviews. People are entitled to their opinions, and this reviewer did raise a couple valid points that will make the next edition of the book better. But what does bother me is when a reviewer judges a book based on what he/she wanted the book to be rather than on the book’s own merits. It’s like saying, “I wanted the book to be THIS, not THAT, and so I’m going review the book that was never intended to be written because that was what I expected it to be.”
What is Man of Fire—or any ECW book—supposed to be? Let’s check our mission statement:
The Emerging Civil War Series, published by Savas Beatie LLC, offers compelling and easy-to-read overviews of some of the Civil War’s most important battles and issues. Each volume features more than a hundred-and-fifty photos and graphics, plus sharp new maps and visually engaging layouts.
So, again, I was left scratching my head when this particular reviewer complained about too many photos and concluded by saying “this book adds nothing to the scholarship that has already been done.”
Except we tell everyone, right up front, what to expect, so, um…?
We’re more than fifty books into this series, and fans know they’re packed with pictures. Most people understand the whole “overview” idea, too. This reviewer, it seems, did not know these things, nor did he apparently try to find out—which, again, is irksome because he criticized the author for being both lazy and sloppy even as he, himself, demonstrated laziness and sloppiness.
I can only sigh.
I’m delighted so many buffs like the Emerging Civil War Series, but we designed these books for people who take a battlefield tour and go, “Wow, that was cool. Is there something I can read to learn a little bit more about that?”
Why, yes, we answered. Yes, there is.
There are also many new people regularly coming into the hobby who don’t want to read a 500-page hardcover on a topic when a 192-page less-expensive paperback loaded with outstanding graphics satisfies their needs.
Occasionally, though, a reviewer will remind me that he/she thinks the book is written for hard-core folks like them. It’s not.
Fortunately, a reviewer with Civil War Monitor from a few months back “got” the book better. Most of all, I encourage you to read the book and judge for yourself. If you’re a fan of the book series, you’ll already know what to expect.
————
P.S.: I will add a mea culpa. Once again, I have a reviewer complaining about no footnotes. Geez, am I tired of fighting that battle. (Wash, rinse, repeat here.) As has become our custom, footnotes/endnotes are posted online (here). BUT—and here’s where the mea culpa comes in—we usually put a blurb in the book’s table of contents that directs people to the citations page on our website and I, as editor, forgot to include that blurb. So, this reviewer was not alerted to fact that notes were, in fact, available. That’s on me.
And the notes are on the website.
Chris, to satisfy, everyone who has a complaint about any of the ECW series books, perhaps you should preface your postscript with a MAXIMA MEA CULPA! For about 10 years now, my husband and I have been Civil War buffs. We joined your blog when we met you for your talk up at Grant’s Cottage, in West Milton, NY. some years ago, now, can’t remember exactly the year. Nonetheless, we were inspired by your blog and I have been a responder of the different articles on there ever since, meeting some fascinating characters along the way! Getting back to the ECW series, I have bought a number of them over the years and was never disappointed in any of them. I especially liked the book on the POW camp at Elmira, in our southern tier here in NYS. Keep those books coming and be true to your calling as you have inspired many others that you will never, ever meet.
Thanks so much for your ongoing support, Judith. I am so glad you’ve been with us for all these years! 🙂
What do you expect from a modern reviewer, that they actually READ the entire book, including the cover? Aren’t you a hopeful soul! I’m sure most just top sheet it between FB posts and tweets!
And Happy New Year, old friend!
Happy New Year to you, too, pal!
Thanks for answering this review. I hope that the reviewer reads your comments and offers an apology. He, obviously, doesn’t understand the Emerging Civil War Series. I liked “Man of Fire” and agreed with the Monitor reviewer. Keep up the great work.
Thanks, Larry. Your long-time support has meant a lot to us. Glad you liked Derek’s book!
As someone who really does love to dive into a good footnote (and I much prefer footnotes to endnotes that most books print today), I totally get why reviewers would want to bring up notations not being printed in an ECW Series book. However, as someone who has personally gone to the footnotes on the ECW site and used them from these books, I know they do exist, and value is not necessarily lost by posting them online vice printed in the text. In fact, I think it is rather innovative to have bonus or alternative material posted online with a note added in the book about it.
I love a good footnote, too, for sure (and, yes, I much prefer footnotes because they’re a good way to engage with the text as you read without having to break your stride).
Don’t worry about it. I just found out Old Baldy’s head is hanging on a wall in Philadelphia. Took me years to find that out but that’s why we do.
I have yet to see that in person, although it’s on my wish list!
Right on, Chris. I happen to be a Gettysnerd and fairly hardcore CW reader, and I STILL enjoy the ECW series a great deal. And as you said, perhaps not every reader wants to delve into, say, Scott Hartwig’s masterful 1,000-page Antietam book, but might enjoy an overview instead. The reviewer in question reminds me of the “real” historians who piled on Ken Burns for, among other things, not spending enough time on Reconstruction. BTW, his film, as I recall, was titled The Civil War, not …and Reconstruction. And as you’ve pointed out before, it was HIS film.
I was stunned when I read the review you mentioned. I am a great supporter of this series. I have and read most of those 50 volumes. Even know I consider myself “a hard core enthusiast”. These books are good for a quick review when I go out on the battlefields. I always look forward to the upcoming titles. Chris keep up the good work. There are those of us who do appreciate it.
You expect a reviewer to read the book? Did you expect the war to end in 90 days?
Can I review the book review section that published the review? The section reviews fewer books each month than when I first subscribed and has dropped the list of other Civil War books published during the month that were not reviewed.