Library Journal 's New and Improved Best List Featuring Help From Me!

I am proud to showcase the Best Books of 2018 via Library Journal. 

From the front page:

This year, LJ eschews our traditional top ten list of best books in favor of a larger and more diverse mix across 20 categories—with 188 titles in total. 

We cast a broad net and coalesced small committees for each category, each headed by an LJ Reviews editor and composed of columnists, reviewers, additional LJ editors, and/or industry experts, culminating in a compelling collection of titles that spotlight the full spectrum of the thousands of books that were published this year.

I was one of those industry experts as I helped editor Kiera Parrott with the Horror list. But I am not proud to showcase this list because they asked for my input. No, I am proud of LJ because they were willing to evolve.

Let me back up a bit.

For the last few years, I have been vocal both publicly, here on the blog, and privately, with notes to those who work for LJ, that their best list was limited. Most of my criticism was about horror not having it's own section. In many publications that have a broad reach [PW, NY Times, etc] I can understand not singling horror out. But Library Journal represents public library readers and horror circulates well in public libraries. It deserved its own category.

I reminded them that they have me write a column 2x a year on horror and that it is very popular [one of the titles on this year's horror best list was from one of those columns by the way]. I kept on them every year. I wasn't mean about it, but I was persistent.

Last year I included LJ in my StokerCon planning as I invited SF/F/H columnist Kristi Chadwick to help me with Librarians' Day. And my persistence paid off as LJ asked me to write their first every feature "Horror Preview" article [July 1 issue]. Now, horror gets its own section.

And that is why I am proud. I am proud of LJ for being willing to evolve. Yes the changes are more than just adding a horror section, but it is all a piece of the bigger puzzle.

LJ is a publication that is willing to take a hard look at itself, assess its strengths and weaknesses, and try to do better. It is hard to completely change the way you've done something for years, especially when LJ's Top 10 format was so entrenched in the best books landscape for so long. How many other major media outlets would be willing to break the mold and rebuild such an important and well respected feature? I can tell you, not many.

They also knew they couldn't do it alone. Editors reached out to people who know the genres to get their opinions and ask them what they thought-- and they listened to us. Again, how many other major media outlet would relinquish full control of the best books process to outsiders.

I am proud of everyone at LJ for their hard work on this list and for their willingness to be more inclusive, even though it meant a lot more work. Now library workers have 188 titles that they can confidently add to their collections with the knowledge that they are building a collection that fully represents the best of everything out there.

Well done LJ.

Now check out all the lists, but especially the horror titles. I reviewed 3 for Booklist, 1 on my own,  and 1 in my October 1st LJ best horror debuts column. I will also have 4 of the 6 titles on my own personal horror top 10 for the year coming soon.