Behind every book review there are two key figures: a book review editor and a reviewer.Editors decide whether a book is reviewed in their publication, when the review appears, how long it is, and who writes the review.
When many periodicals feature the same books, this does not prove that the editors of different periodicals have not made individual decisions. Before publication, editors receive news releases and printer’s proofs of certain books, signifying that the publishers will make special efforts to promote these books. They will be heavily advertised and probably be among the books that most bookstores order in quantity. Not having such books reviewed might give the impression that the editor was caught napping, whereas too many reviews of books that readers will have trouble finding in stores would be inappropriate. Editors can risk having a few of the less popular titles reviewed, but they must consider what will be newsworthy, advertised, and written about elsewhere.
If these were the only factors influencing editors, few books that stand little chance of selling well would ever be reviewed. But editors feel some concern about what might endure, and therefore listen to literary experts. A generation ago, a newspaper used a brilliant system of choosing which books to feature. The book review editor sent out a greater number of books than reviews he actually intended to publish. If a review was unenthusiastic, he reasoned that the book was not important enough to be discussed immediately, and if good reviews of enough other books came in, the unenthusiastic review might never be printed. The unenthusiastic reviewers were paid promptly anyway, but they learned that if they wanted their material to be printed, it was advisable to be kind.
Most editors print favorable and unfavorable reviews; however, the content of the review may be influenced by the editor. Some editors would actually feel that they had failed in their responsibility if they gave books by authors they admired to hostile critics or books by authors they disapproved of to critics who might favor them. Editors usually can predict who would review a book enthusiastically and who would tear it to shreds.
It can be inferred that, as a prospective book buyer, the author of the passage would generally respond to highly enthusiastic reviews of new books with
文章提及了两种编辑决定是否给书评的方式：1.出版商想推广的书，写书评；2. 寄书给很多书评家，如果书有坏的书评，那么就说明这个书没有写书评的价值。那么这两种方式可以说都是不太正当的，Most editors print favorable and unfavorable reviews; however, the content of the review may be influenced by the editor.这里也提及，书评的内容会受到编辑的影响，所以作者对书评的态度应该是比较怀疑的。
题干：作为一位prospective book buyer，作者可能会对那些highly enthusiastic reviews作何反应？ 整篇文章都是在讲editors怎么去努力地sell这些book，怎么去控制这个reviews，前面做的题目就是 too many reviews of books that readers will have trouble finding in stores would be inappropriate.这一句就是反过来说畅销书要有很多reviews，又说The book review editor sent out a greater number of books than reviews he actually intended to publish. If a review was unenthusiastic, he reasoned that the book was not important enough to be discussed immediately, and if good reviews of enough other books came in, the unenthusiastic review might never be printed. The unenthusiastic reviewers were paid promptly anyway, but they learned that if they wanted their material to be printed, it was advisable to be kind.好书，那些unenthusiastic的reviews就不会printed，反正就是说editors 控制和利用这个reviews去sell他的books，商业行为，就算是一般白的东西也可以说成超级白，所以从作者的视角来看，readers就是要skeptical了
0 0 回复 2021-06-27 15:49:11
This of course leaves skepticism as the best candidate. The passage does suggest that this might be the passage author's attitude: the passage discusses the impact of commercial considerations—the business of selling books—on review editors' choices regarding which books to review. It follows that highly enthusiastic reviews may, at least in some cases, be influenced by such considerations. With this in mind, the author of the passage is likely to approach such reviews with skepticism. In other words, the author holds a certain amount of doubt as to whether such reviews accurately reflect the true worth of the books reviewed.