NYT Ranks the 50 Best Thrillers of the Century so Far (and I was honored to be one of the experts they asked)

You might have seen that the New York Times Books Section released a list of the 50 Best Thrillers of the 21st Century So Far. I have a gift link available for you here. 

Back in May I opened an email from the NYT inviting me to participate. It came with my own personalized survey link. It was a great honor and a lot of fun, but I am not surprised that Gone Girl came in at #1. It was my top pick too. 

Before we talk about this list more, I need to take everyone back to 2012 when Gone Girl came out. I was one of the first people to read this book. I had met Gillian through an event my library hosted with Karin Slaughter. She got me an early copy of Gone Girl and I said to her-- I loved this book, but I am not sure American readers are ready to hate everyone in a book. Thankfully I was wrong. 

Before it was released, we set up a one on one interview with her and me at the Berwyn Public Library (where I worked). You can still watch baby Gillian and baby Becky do this interview here on the Berwyn Public Library's YouTube channel. This interview is so old, it was back when YouTube limited free accounts to 15 mins per video max. Such fun memories. My kids were 10 and 7 back then! It was so long ago.

That interview ended up being on the exact day Gone Girl hit the bestseller list and changed Gillian's life and well, everything about the psychological suspense genre forever- and in ways we haven't seen since Hitchcock. 

Anyone who was working in publishing or working with readers in any way in 2012 understood what happened. The Psychological thriller changes from being driven by men and serial killer characters like Hannibal Lecter to the female driven, domestic suspense, fueled by the unreliable narrator that we have now. 

So, when I got the email and my private survey link to be a part of this NYT list, I knew immediately that Gone Girl was on my list. I also included Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, My Sister, the Serial Killer, SA Cosby ( I can't remember which title I submitted), 11/22/62, and In the Woods among others. I say among others because I really don't remember my full list. It was due around StokerCon and I figured it out on paper and then entered it before I left and threw the paper out.

When you go to the list (gift link), you will see this header:

As voted on by 291 crime novelists, editors, booksellers, librarians and other book lovers. See how their ballots stack up.

I may not have my list of books highlighted here like my pals Stephen Graham Jones, Victor LaValle, and Daniel Kraus, but I want everyone to know they did care about us librarians. They are not just saying they asked us, I know they did. I am thankful for that.

I also want to note that every title has some readalike options. 

Get this list ready for your patrons, make lists online in in your buildings. Everyone will be talking about this for at least the next few weeks. Oh and go add some more copies of Gone Girl right now. 

And thanks to the NYT for including me in the creation of this fun list.

The NYT Gamifies Summer Reading (Gift Link)

I know many of us have worked to gamify our summer reading for many years now. As we have learned, adults love checking off boxes or completing BINGO cards for prizes as much (maybe more) than kids do.

Reading challenges are around all year long, but many people are intimidated by joining the ones that start in January. A year of reading seems like a big commitment to people who haven't read more than a book or two for fun in years. However, when you take the same idea of a challenge and market it as "Summer Reading," many people jump at the chance to give it a try.

Summer is three months. Summer gives people time to be outside and relax-- even if just on a few weekends. Summer holds fun memories of childhood summer reading.

Last week, the New York Times Book Review launched their "Summer Reading Bucket List" (gift link here). They have ten items that are very general and easy to complete. And there is even a box to check for reading a book from the library (with bonus points if you talked to the library worker to get the suggestion).

What I love about this summer reading game is that it easy to complete. They are only challenging you to get to 5 of the 10 options before Fall. It gives some direction, but not too much. Five books seems like a doable number for those who are not regular readers. Pretty much any book is an option. Literally. And they have a way for you to turn in your sheet and be eligible for a prize.

The New York Times has prioritized gathering data from actual readers for a while now. All of those checklists for their "best books" to have people mark if they read a book or want to read a book, etc... This is a grab for user data that I can get behind because they are using it to actively craft their book coverage, to make sure they are covering the books that people actually want to read, not just what the snotty literati think we should read.

This is a huge shift in the NYT Book Review over the last few years and I am here for it. We are in a landscape where most papers have dropped their books coverage, but the NYT is trying to fill that gap. Yes they provide reviews and commentary about the most important literary titles, but as I have been covering here as well, they are also making an effort to cover genre and even backlist titles. They want to help you-- all of you, any kind of reader-- find a book that you will love and get you back into reading. 

And bonus because they always support libraries. Yes they added us to their list, but it is more than that. See this post I had last week (with a gift link) for another example.

But here is another important point I want to make today, many libraries still do not offer a summer reading challenge or program for adults. I don't understand it myself. I made sure my library always had summer reading for adults to match the ones we had for children (going back to 2000). They are important both because when parents read with kids, kids do better with their own reading.

But also, Adults need the chance to have fun reading a book, to complete their checklist, and earn a prize. Life is short, things are awful, why are we not offering adults books with a side of joy.

Don't we want our adults coming back to the library again? Don't we want the people who pay the taxes to fund us and come to the polls or board meetings for us when we need their support to feel like we care about them too? Why do we ignore the recreational needs of our adults? 

So I am sharing this to help all of you who do NOT have a summer reading program already. Go here and use the NYT Summer Reading Bucket List to make your own to hand out for adults. Summer reading starts this weekend at most libraries. They have all been working on it for months, but you...the library that isn't offering an adult program....you can still do something right now.

And for those of you who already have a summer reading program, this is a great resource to enhance what you are already offering. Maybe you don't have a BINGO card yet? Maybe you have a full program with your themes and lists all set up, but you know that it will be too restrictive for some readers. Here you go. 

[Side note, I hate putting restrictions on reading for adults and making them follow our themes. Themes are great to guide those who want to follow, but it should not restrict if people can participate-- adults or kids. We want them to read. We don't want to create more obstacles to stop that. We need to stop being Gate Keepers and start being Gate Openers. Click on this link for more about that.)

And for those of you who are all set and have the perfect, flexible summer reading program set to start for adults in a few days, great, but you can still save this link and use it for Fall Reading or Winter Reading or even next year's planning. It is NOT tied to a specific year or trend or even season. Just change the one that is season specific to whatever season you use this in.

I have posted the graphic from the article below in case you want to just print it out and hand it off to people. If you do this and you have NYT access for your patrons, this bucket list can serve to also advertise your NYT access. I talk to people all the time who have no idea that most of the major newspapers are available at the library, from home even with your card. Make the list available in print and online with a note to remind people of their access available with their library card.

This post is here to get you to think about all the ways you can use this ready made summer reading resource to help your readers have a fun summer-- whether you have it all planned and ready to roll out this weekend or not. 

How will you use this list with your readers? If you have summer reading plans you want me to share with my readers, contact me and we can see about a guest post here on the blog.

NYT Shares How A Book Gets on Our Library Shelves Considering Post B&T Collapse Issues and Why This is All Part of Our Inability to Communicate Who We Are and What We Do

I talk at length about how bad we, as a profession are at communicating with the general pubic. I have a longer, more general post about that here. But I also have a tag for "communicate better" because whenever there is a big library issue, we DO NOT GET AHEAD OF IT and that hurts us.

My most recent example (before today) is the eBook pricing issue that I have been working on fixing here in IL-- for years, but it is finally going somewhere. Click here and here for that. That second link includes my letter that was filed as part of our hearing for the House. We got through the IL House with a 99-0 vote and are awaiting the Senate to move on it. 

When we communicate our needs and how our processes work clearly, people listen. Even when they are frustrated. And today I have a perfect example, except it was not US who stepped up to communicate it was the NYT.

Let me back track. 

As we all know, last year, B&T imploded. Yes I know many of you were too busy scrambling to communicate what was going on to your patrons, even as it led to delays in books getting on the shelf. This was our first mistake, to not designate someone to get the word out far and wide using the same energy we use to get the word out about a program we want to succeed. This is our bread and butter. The books we collect on our shelves.

Putting that aside, even though I should not. I need to call everyone out a bot further here because every single one of us who used B&T has known for years that there were serious problems with B&T. Yes some was from when they were hacked during the pandemic, but they were doing badly before that and it never improved after. Yes it was shocking when they simply shut down and stop serving us with no warning...BUT, come on, it was not like they were fulfilling our orders in a timely fashion, and forget about seeing new books for months if you used their cataloging services.

We should have not only been ready for them to implode, but we should have also been hiring staff to help us process what books we did get and shed their shoddy service.

But I digress. 

Months later, many libraries are still struggling to fill the hole. And look, I am not trying to minimize how devastating this was to libraries everywhere and of every size. BUT we have stayed silent about what it looks like on the ground. As libraries are dealing with book challenges, a call to provide more and more community services, so many other things, our inability to get the bestsellers people want on the shelves- that we stayed silent about.

This was our chance to make it clear that we are doing our best, that what it takes to get a book from ordered to on the shelf is complicated. We did not do that, and as a result, people who would have been our supporters, have been angry that they aren't getting our books. BECAUSE WE STAYED SILENT. BECAUSE WE DID NOT TEL OUR STORY FOR OURSELVES. We lost a chance to garner more goodwill. 

But thankfully the book reporters at the New York Times worked with Iowa City Public Library to tell our story to a wider audience. 

Here is the excellent, clear, and full of photos article they published. I have provided a gift link for you all.

And the article goes above and beyond the basics. For example, they explain in clear and easy language, how B&T was not just a place to order the books, nor was it only the place to order and have things processed, but also many libraries used their suite of services to help them get the right number of bestsellers on the shelves, whether that was predictive ordering or even standing order author plans. 

When I did collection development we had the 250 standing order author plan. Those were 250 authors (we updated it each year) that I never had to even think about. Their books just came to my library. Now, libraries have to remember to order every single James Patterson, Stephen King, Nora Roberts etc...

I have heard library people tell me that some of these more nuanced things are too complicated to explain to the public. Well, this article just proved that argument wrong. 

Please, please, please...I am begging all of you, as a library, prioritize communicating who we are and what we do with your community on a regular basis. Share how the sausage is made. Make it a part of your normal marketing. Again, use the same strategies you use to get people to come to your biggest program. Be clear, open, and communicative with your community and they will be hairier with our services while we will get taken advantage of a lot less often.

Thank you to the NYT for telling a story all of us needed to be shared with a wider audience.

NYT Best Books of the Year (So Far) and Their Enhanced Genre Coverage

The New York Times Books section just released their 2026 Best Books of the Year (So Far) (gift link). I love a few things about this list and all of it comes from the NYT Books sections concerted effort to be more inclusive of all types of books and reading experiences.

First, the list is focused NOT on the quality of writing alone. Yes that matters, but they have proclaimed the mission statement for how they chose these books in the subtitle for the article: "The nonfiction and novels we can't stop thinking about." This statement makes it clear that the reader's experience matters.

Second, and related, in the past, the NYT would pride themselves on picking the most obscure books. It was their badge of honor. The staff of the section has had a major overhaul in the last few years and the results are showing. The NYT Books section and their lists are serious about connecting readers with the best books for them, full stop. And in fact, obscure is now seen as a bad choice, unless the writers believe it has a wide appeal that has been overlook by others.

Third, and also related, there are genre titles here, and more than one token choice. Genre works can be among the best even when considered across all literature. And this list has genre titles, books that have long queues at your library right now. The inclusion of more genre in the NYT best lists is directly correlated to their increased genre coverage in general. I wrote about this, here, in February when the NYT released their Romance glossary. And then last week, they added a Fantasy column to their regular rotation of Sunday Book Review section genre coverage. They are now regularly covering the most popular genres in fiction and nonfiction, and that coverage has led to the best of those books being added to overall best lists. Knowledge matters. If they are paying writers to cover genre titles, obviously the cream will rise to the top and the very best will be allowed to break through into the over all best conversation, a fact we know well at libraries.

Fourth, the list is not huge. It is focused. If someone wanted to read them all, they could. And they have been adding a feature throughout all of their lists that takes advantage of the fact that many people have a digital subscription to the NYT now. You can click to say you have read a book or that you want to read it and it will be saved in your account. All of this encourages people to find a book that they will actually read. And get ready, because they will come to us to get their copy to read. This is why I have included gift links, so even if you do not have access, you can see these lists.

And I think that is the final thing to say here. The NYT used to be focused on telling us about books you would probably never read. Sure they'd throw readers a bone or two over the course of the year, but they absolutely did not prioritize the reader. Not any more. Now, they want you to read the books they are reviewing, they are covering them and including a wide swath of titles to encourage you to give more titles a try, and they are slowly re-building trust with lists that SHOW they care about all types of books and readers.

With the closing of many newspaper sections that had serious coverage of books, the NYT actively trying to fill in all the gaps. Most libraries have digital access to the paper. Please make sure you are using their Books coverage as one of your regular resources, especially if you haven't visited in a while. And get ready for all of the titles mentioned in their Books coverage (especially the genre and best coverage) to lead to longer holds queues.

Romance Glossary from the NYT (Gift Link)

Romance has always been among our most popular genres in terms of library checkouts and enjoying romance publicly has definitely become more socially acceptable since 2020. Think pieces and collage classes about the genre have also proliferated. But nothing says Romance is mainstream more than the New York Times creating a glossary for general readers to understand it better.

I am posting that glossary (from 2/12/26) here with a gift link because I know that while some library workers are Romance super fans, many more are barely literate in the lingo. It is way past time that you get up to speed.

Every single library workers needs to access this glossary so that we can understand the current state of Romance and how its fans interact with this perennially popular genre. But we also need it to help those new to Romance (whether they are coming from Romantasy or Heated Rivalry or Cozies or just because they have always wanted to try it and were embarrassed, but now as it is in the NYT, they see their opening to go for it). Romance writers rely on readers knowing and understanding key terms and themes. The writers build off of this knowledge to enhance the stories they are telling, the frames, and the characters. 

As I teach in my Genre overview program, Romance is all about how the authors deliver on tropes, themes, and characters. Since the basic arc of the plot is predetermined by definition, Romance wins over the hearts of its readers with the details. In fact, as I argue in my genre program, Romance readers not only demand creativity, interesting situations, and well built characters, but they also expect the authors to surprise them within the confines the established rules. Understanding this is the key to helping established Romance readers and shepherding those new to the genre as well.

Get up to speed yourself with the NYT's guide to all things romance in a glossary format. Below I have included the introduction. Click here to read the access glossary via a gift link.

Your A–Z Guide to
All Things Romance

From cinnamon rolls to stern brunch daddies, here are 101 terms you should know to understand the popular literary genre.

By Jennifer Harlan Illustrations by Millie von Platen

Jennifer Harlan spent years reading hundreds of romance novels to prepare for this story. Her favorite trope is black cat/golden retriever.

Apron tugger. Shadow daddy. Wallflower. Fae. Sometimes it can feel as if romance novels come with their own special language — one you must learn in order to achieve maximum swoon. If you’re a dedicated reader, this terminology can help you pinpoint exactly which books will be your speed; if you’re new to the game, they can overwhelm you like so much overdressed word salad. 

Whether you’re a superfan or a casual reader, if you’re genre-curious or you just want to understand why people keep talking about “spice” at the bookstore, here are 101 terms you should know. If you see something that strikes your fancy, we’ve got recommendations for books that show off these terms at their best. With any luck, you’ll find something to fall in love with — which, after all, is the whole point.

Again, click here to access the full glossary. I have also added it to my Free Genre Resources handout in the Romance section and will be adding it to my Genre slides when they are updated for 2026 (coming soon).

NYT Summer Reading Website

The New York Times has greatly improved the website for their summer reading this year.  They still have the wide range of categories but the site is easier to use. Click here to see 73 suggestions in the following categories:

• Thrillers
• Cooking
• True Crime
• Movies & TV
• Romance
• Travel
• Music
• The Great Outdoors
• Sports

Also, if you scroll to the very bottom of the Summer Reading site, there is access to a few more articles like these:

Of course, this site is not perfect; then again no single resource ever is. For example, here there is the glaring absence of ANY speculative fiction, and there is no link to summer reading suggestions from previous years. However, I do like the larger range of Nonfiction this list provides.

I would highly suggest pairing this site with my favorite Summer Reading resource-- The PW Summer Reading site with full backlist access.

Summer is in the air. Let’s not forget that many adults pick up their only books of the year during the summer. Let’s make sure we have a nice wide range of suggestions for them. And, they don’t have to be brand new to be worth their time.

The NYTBR Response to The Romance Column Makes Everything Worse- Or Becky’s How to Actually Professionally Review Genre Fiction

Okay, now I am even more angry. I can’t believe the NYTBR is screwing this all up so badly. [If you don’t know what I am talking about, click here for the first post about this topic.]

Let me step back....

I hope you know, both from my in-depth piece here, and many other outlets including this excellent piece by SBTB, that the NYTBR wrote what was supposed to be a column on the state of Romance today. But what they actually published was a judgmental and dismissive article about the genre.

Yesterday-- over a week later-- they got around to this response. Click through to read it and then come back here....

....Not helpful at all, right?

Specifically though, I am most mad about this line:

"Our goal is not simply to recommend books or enthuse about them — though we do have two recurring features reserved for exactly those functions: our weekly book recommendations and an occasional column called “The Enthusiast.” Our goal is to assess and critique the books on offer."

And previously, they argue that Mr. Gottlieb is doing “critique" correctly because he is:

"a longtime editor of writers including Michael Crichton and Toni Morrison; an accomplished critic who has written on dance, music, biography and a wide range of fiction and nonfiction; and also a voracious reader of contemporary romance."

I agree, in their reviews they are critiquing books.  The NYTBR does not only give positive reviews, and they shouldn’t. But, when you review genre titles critically, you should review them within the confines of the genre they are written in-- not in comparison to literary fiction. Just because Mr Gottlieb reads romance novels, doesn’t mean he knows how to review them. What he does know is how to critique the more “literary” or high brown variety.

Seriously, I think we all learned this in Kindergarten math-- you compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges. Do they really not understand this?

But why specifically am I so mad.  Well many reasons, but the one I am most qualified to get on a soapbox and shake my public fist at is this-- I am a professional genre reviewer and I don’t think what Mr. Gottlieb did was be a genre critic.

Let me explain.  I review literary fiction, nonfiction, science fiction, fantasy, and horror. Mostly, horror but I am paid to review those other genres too. Each and every time I get a title to review, I judge it based on its genre. How is it in comparison to other books in the genre? Is it better than its peers? What does it do best given its genre confines? Where is it weaker than its peers?

I am not comparing a horror novel in front of me to WAR AND PEACE. Why would I? That is not the space where the horror novel lives. When I love a horror novel, I love it because it is a great example of the genre. When I don’t like a horror novel, it is because I don’t think it is a good example of the best of the genre.

There is a huge area between being an “enthusiast” or fan and a critic. Although from the quotes above I don’t think NYTBR thinks so.

Hey NYTBR, I know the difference between a fan and a critic. I am both. And you are dismissing the criticism of your column by telling you readers we aren’t able to make this distinction. Nope. I for one will not take your chastising. You are wrong. We can make the distinction. It is you who do not understand how to critically review genre titles.

A column which looked at the state of Romance today could have been done much better. A less judgmental discussion of the highs and lows of the genre today would have helped more readers. It would have made the fans happy and it would have been more interesting for the readers who thought romance was beneath you. A better article would not have forced you to deal with so much criticism from both sides of the issue.

Tomorrow I hope to talk about something else here on the blog.  In the meantime, I also had this post on where to find some good reviews of romance novels. Go read a romance in protest.

Don’t Be Judgmental About What People Like to Read-- The NYT Book Review Fails Again

I would like to start this post by saying I hate the fact that I have been calling the NYT Book Review out for their failures recently. Specifically, I was [and still am] very angry about the Book Match column [it’s still the pinned tweet at the top of my Twitter timeline], but there is a much more detailed discussion of the larger problems here.

I am a life long home delivery subscriber of the paper. I walked a mile, literally [round trip], every day in college to get my reserved copy at A.J Hastings. I would seriously think twice before moving somewhere that home delivery of this paper was not an option.

But despite this, and despite some positive changes the NYT Book coverage has made over the last few years, all I want to do after this weekend’s debacle with this Romance column“A Roundup of the Seasonal Romance Novels” by Robert Gottlieb is shake my fists in anger. 

Why are people still making fun of Romance books? Who cares if you like them or not? Who care if you think they are “good Literature” or not? If you don’t like them, don’t read them and most certainly, do not write a column highlighting the genre for the biggest book coverage media outlet in the land and inject it with your judgey-mcjudgers attitude. This does not make you seem smart. This does not make your seem Literary. This makes you look stupid, petty, and mean.

There are so many things wrong with this column. The first of which is that it is supposed to highlight the best of the genre right now and all it does is disparage the genre. I am not going to go through and point every problem out because Ron Hogan already did an excellent job at that in his piece, “All the Dumb Things You Can Say About Romance Novels, In One Convenient Place.” I especially like this statement which condemns the author [a respected editor of the likes of Toni Morrison and Doris Lessing]:

Now, the New York Times may not be the only place an 86-year-old white man get away with saying a black woman’s characters don’t seem very black to him without anybody in the editorial chain chiming in about whether this literally gratuitous swipe is really necessary to the overarching theme of the essay. But it’s a place where this sort of thing is not uncommon. 

A couple things I noticed on  my first reading of this column [yes, I have read it more than once] were:

1. Gottlieb says there are only two categories of romance right now-- Regency or Contemporary. WHAT?!?! Okay, that’s just straight out wrong and any decent editor would have questioned this. Heck, any librarian would have immediately called foul by pulling out all of the paranormal and Amish romances waiting to be shelved at this very second. Here is the Romance Writers of America’s most recent list of all of the subgenres, and please note, Historical is a subgenre under which Regency falls, but Regency is by no means the only historical period covered in Romance novels.
2. His anger about Romances always and forever ending with the HEA and marriage is actually even more troubling. THAT IS THE RULE OF THE GENRE. If it doesn’t end that way, it isn’t a romance.  Again, I defer to the experts at RWA with their definition of the Romance Genre which states that a Romance must have, "An Emotionally Satisfying and Optimistic Ending: In a romance, the lovers who risk and struggle for each other and their relationship are rewarded with emotional justice and unconditional love." What is wrong with you Gottlieb? Next you are going to tell us how annoying it that Fantasy relies on the “crutch” of magic to tell a story. Oh, I’m sorry, the editors wouldn’t let that in because men write Fantasy so it is a higher genre. Women writers and women readers aren’t worth as much, so we can make fun of the fact that their genre has rules and tropes. 

Again, there is much, much more here, but Hogan does an excellent job of breaking it down, so read him too. And, since he is a man standing up for the genre and its readers, people might actually listen.

Look, I am not surprised that a Literary Fiction editor wrote condescendingly about Romance. I am not naive. But I am angry that the editors at the NYT Book Review let this drivel be published the way it was written.

Finally please know that I am not a Romance expert, or even a fan, but I have been on the record as saying that Romance readers are among my favorite to help. They love their books and they can tell you why. They know what they are looking for and can discuss their personal appeal preferences. Most importantly, romance readers have taught me how to be a better RA librarian. I have learned how to listen to what readers are asking for and then apply that to the resources to identify titles for them even when I am not a reader of that type of book myself. Romance readers give us feedback. They cheer when we get a suggestion right and lay into us when we are wrong [nicely]. Also, they are the best book talkers around. You want to learn to book talk better, ask a romance reader to tell you about their recent favorite. I promise you will learn something.

I love Romance because the fans love it. They energize me to find them another wonderful read.

Our first rule of RA Service, the fact that we are all guided by as we start each day helping readers, is Betty Rosenberg's, “Never apologize for your reading tastes.” Now I get that book reviews are supposed to judge a book’s merit. Again, I am not naive, I am paid reviewer of genre titles. I understand my charge. I currently love Hematophages by Stephen Kozeniewksi. It is an awesome horror novel. But is it the best book I have ever read? Of course not. But that wasn’t my charge to compare it to ALL books. I was reviewing it’s merits as a horror novel, and as such, it is wonderful!

When others in the book world decide to be judgmental about an entire genre of books in principle, rather than judging each book on its merit based on the genre’s rules and tropes-- that is wrong. It is mean. It is detrimental to all genre reviews and reviewers because it is unprofessional.

And, most importantly,  it doesn’t help any readers find their next good read. And NYT Book Review, I ask you, why else would you have a Romance column unless you wanted to help Romance readers? Seriously, why did you print this because I cannot figure out why except that you are unprofessional and mean-- both things I don’t think you are or are trying to be.

There are many people waiting for an explanation and an apology.

NYT Books Coverage-- The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Readers of this blog know that I have a love-hate relationship with the major media and how they promote and cover leisure reading.

On the one hand, I applaud outlets like NPR for their forward thinking book coverage [I am not surprised because I went to college with one of the people in charge of it]. Click here for some examples which I have highlighted in the past. But on the other hand, these same places I applaud are just as bad as every single media outlet when talking about leisure reading in that they NEVER go to the true book experts-- the library workers. [Okay well once in a while, NPR has Nancy Pearl on, but that’s really it, and for the record, they are light years ahead of everyone else and all we get is an occasional Nancy Pearl.]

The New York Times is a great example of what I am calling “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly” of how the book media handles helping actual, real life readers. By that I mean, providing coverage based on how people actually read, not based on only the critical favorites or the major publishers, or the bestsellers. Libraries, we get how to help actual real life readers. We know how to anticipate what they will ask for and work with them to find their next read. Traditional media....not as good. They have the idea of what readers are like and their needs in their heads. They have no actual experience serving people-- warts, quirks and all.

In this post I will use the NYT and their book coverage to illustrate the very best of traditional media book coverage, the disappointing parts, and the just plain ugly-- “help” that is so bad it could hurt the entire industry of those of us who help leisure readers for a living.

But before I start complaining, let me begin by saying I am a life-long home delivery, print subscriber to the paper. As a child in NJ we got the NYT every day. In college I walked here to pick up my physical paper every single day. And when I moved to Illinois, I continued to get the NYT delivered..in paper.. every single day to my home, city and suburbs. Yes, I am 41 and get a physical paper, we exist [it comes with unlimited digital access too]. So all of the comments I will be making below come from a place of knowledge. I love the NYT, but it is not perfect and their books coverage is a great example of one step forward, two steps back.

Okay, let’s start positivity. I was ELATED to see the June 4th, Summer Reading issue of the Sunday New York Times Book Review because they had columns on actual genre books, including this one on horror. What I liked about the horror column was that it looked at the wide range of what horror is today and offered up many options- including small press options.  Well done.

Readers love genre in the summer, especially horror and thrillers (which are also represented here). As a librarian in FL recently told me, “People love to read about horrible things happening to other people while they sit by the pool."

So that’s the good, however, here is the bad about their Summer Reading Issue-- all of that good content to help genre readers is really hard to pull up online because they have NOT created a tag to pull up all Summer Reading with one click. Come to speak of it, they have no tags on their content at all. How can we pull it up and use it to help readers if you don’t link all of the useful content? Why, why can they not figure this basic indexing issue out. Oh, I know why. They don’t have any input from librarians. We are all about indexing, cataloging, and retrieval of information.

Seriously, though most libraries have a print subscription to at least the Sunday Book Review but it is not always easily available to be used to help a patron. In general, the NYT Books coverage needs to work on its online ease of use by readers and the library workers who want to use their coverage to help readers. With the recent change to having one editor for all book coverage at the paper now, maybe this is in the works. But, it is 2017 and tags are old news, yet the NYT has never used them. So basically, there is some great content being published but using it to actual help a reader after the day of publication is difficult [at best].

And now it is time for THE UGLY. I have been beyond angry about the new Dear Match Book Column from the NYT for a while now. How angry? Well, I have pinned my angry tweet about it to the top of my feed for all to see. Here is a screen shot of that tweet:

Without the help of any professional book suggesters- otherwise known as library workers-- a book critic takes people’s requests for their next read and offers up suggestions.

I was worried about the bad results from the start as you can see in that tweet, and unfortunately only a few weeks in there was a total disaster of  advice on May 23rd.

Thank goodness for my amazing editor Rebecca Vnuk who stopped the presses [literally, she stopped editing for Booklist to do this] and tried to right the wrong done to this poor reader with this post, “Actual Epistolary Beach Reads.” From that piece:

In the May 23, 2017 “Match Book” column in the New York Times Book Review, a reader named Anetra Smith explains that she’s going on a much-needed beach vacation and would like to bring some epistolary novels because she loved The Divorce Papers by Susan Rieger and The Attachments by Rainbow Rowell. She received suggestions for Bram Stoker’s Dracula, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, and, for a touch of romance, Super Sad True Love Story by Gary Shteyngart. 

The librarians on my Facebook feed went nuts: “Yes, if you liked Attachments, you’ll LOVE Dracula! I say that all the time, don’t you?” Or, my favorite: “I just turned my head so far sideways it’s nearly parallel with my shoulders.” 

I’m not entirely sure what the thought process was that lead to the Times’ recommendations (note: just because the title includes “love story” doesn’t mean it’s a romance), but hopefully I can save Ms. Smith’s vacation with the following suggestions, linked to their Booklist reviews.

Click through to read her many well thought out suggestions. [By the way, this reaction is exactly why I write for Rebecca and call her a friend too.]

As Rebecca and I discussed privately, did the columnist Google “epistolary novels” and then do a second search adding the word “love?”  We ask because those are some of the answers you get by doing just that.

I love that the NYT wanted to help readers to find their next read, but why are they asking book critics to do it when there are professionally trained and extremely experienced people to do this job in every single public library in America.  Do you go to a medical journalist to be diagnosed when you are ill? No you go to a doctor. So when you want a book suggestion, you should ask the library worker. Of all people, the NYT Book’s editors should know about us and our expertise. We are the biggest subscribers to their product.

By the way, on a related note, this column...this disaster of a column....this they have archived easily with this link, but not Summer Reading!?!?! Yeesh

So there is my report on "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" of the NYT’s book coverage. I know they are trying and some of it is excellent, but please all book media, please stop ignoring our expertise. We know better than you how to do these jobs. We are willing to share our knowledge, if only you gave us a tiny bot of respect and asked us to help you.

New York Times Notable Books List and How It Can Help You

I had another post planned for today, but I wanted to make sure I posted the link to the NYT Notable Books list. [That post will go up later this week.]

This is a list of 100 books. What I love about the list is its length.  Why? Well first you get some nice surprises when you have 100 books.  Yes, a few of my favorites which were on many other lists are there, but that’s not all.

For example, one book I was so glad to see on there was the graphic novel Here by Richard McGuire which I started reading last night and had to force myself to stop so I could get some reviews finished. It is wonderful, but this is the only list where I have seen it mentioned.

The length at 100 books also means that there is a good chance you have something from this list on your shelves right now to satisfy readers who want to read the “best" books. [Don’t forget to check out my post about how to make the curse of the “best” list season work in your favor.]

But finally, I love this list because it serves as one of my favorite collection development tools for the general leisure reading collection.  While I realize that not every library can order all 100 books, I always used this list to check against my collection.  Did we order these books throughout the year? Did they circulate? Is this what our patrons wanted to read? What conclusions can I draw about my population’s reading preferences and the “best” titles? What books did my patrons like more that are not on this list?

The Notable Books list is one a few “guideposts” that you can use to quickly measure the state of your collection and the state of “literature” in America today. It is long enough to cover multiple areas of interest and appeal, but short enough to be sorted through in a timely manner.

RA Conversation Starter: How Relevant Is the Author's Bio?

The question above is one that comes up for all readers at some point in their lives.  Some readers always want to know how a work of fiction relates to the author's life while others do not care as long as the story they are reading rings true.

For me this question came up twice in the past week as I am working on fishing up a Read Alike article for Novelist on Dan Simmons [and considering his biography as I summarize his work and why people love him in a mere 1300 words] and as I read A Constellation of Vital Phenomenon for a book discussion, an amazing book all about Chechnya, but written by an American.

So it was fitting as I was catching up on old NYT Book Reviews to see this point counter point in the Bookends column, "When We Read Fiction, How Relevant is the Author's Biography?"

From the text:

"Each week in Bookends, two writers take on questions about the world of books. This week, Thomas Mallon and Adam Kirsch discuss whether knowing about an author’s life deepens or detracts from the pleasures of reading fiction."

Author Thomas Mallon wrote about how much less the bio matters now, while writer and editor Adam Kirsch talks about how history has shown that there are times when understanding the biography of the writer makes 

What I like about the essays is that they are both right. Anyone who works with readers or is a reader his or herself would enjoy taking a look at what each has to say.

Me, I am still completely up in the air as to whether the author's background is important to me or not.  I guess it all depends on the book and my mood.  But I was happy to read 2 eloquent writers debate the merits on both sides of the issue.  It made me feel okay to stay ambivalent.

But the real reason I posted this installment of Bookends is to give you a new passive RA idea.  Why not post the weekly column of Bookends at your library near where leisure readers browse or near your desk each and every week.  Who knows what kind of conversations it will start between staff and patrons?

Sometimes, our patrons want to ask us for help picking out their next great read, but they think they need to have a specific title in mind in order to approach us. Let's anticipate that and instead give them as many reasons as possible to talk to us.  Once we provide the conversation starter, the RA transactions will flow. And if the conversation starter changes every week, they have a reason to come back.  Even better, if we use resources like the NYT Book Review (for which we are paying for a subscription already), we are making less work for ourselves and being more efficient with the patron's tax dollars.  Everybody wins!

Tomorrow, I will share with you one of the easiest and most effective conversation starter tricks that we employ to great success at the BPL RA desk.

Happy Dr. Sleep Day and Place of Horror in Literature

This is a cross post with RA for All Horror.

Whether you are still a huge Stephen King fan, or you got bored with him years ago, everyone has to admit that today's release of Dr. Sleep is a big deal.

While The Stand is still King's best work ever, at over 1,000 pages, it is not the place most people begin to read this American storytelling master.  Rather it is with The Shining that people new to King most often (and should) begin.

The Shining is still the best example of a modern (post 1970) ghost story.  It has set the bar for all haunted house stories since, and it established that King was not a fluke. With The Shining the world took notice of King's talent, and he has rarely disappointed us in the three and a half decades since.

King is also a very popular choice with advanced readers, and with its young protagonist (Danny), The Shining is also popular with teen readers.

All of this being said, after 36 years of waiting, there are millions of people who want to see what has become of Danny in the years since he battled both his father and the ghouls at the Overlook Hotel.

So, it came as no surprise to me that on Sunday, the New York Times Book Review ran Dr. Sleep as their front page review.  But what did come as a happy surprise was that the fabulous and intelligent Margaret Atwood wrote the review.

Look, even if you don't think you need to read the review as a librarian because you already know who likes King at your library and you already know it will be in huge demand, you still need to click through and read this review because she goes into a longer discussion of King's place in the history of American literature AND talks about horror's importance in general.

From the second page:

Some may look skeptically at “horror” as a subliterary genre, but in fact horror is one of the most literary of all forms. Its practitioners read widely and well — King being a pre-eminent example — since horror stories are made from other horror stories: you can’t find a real-life example of the Overlook Hotel. People do “see” some of the things King’s characters see (for a companion volume, try Oliver Sacks’s “Hallucinations”), but it is one of the functions of “horror” writing to question the reality of unreality and the unreality of reality: what exactly do we mean by “see”?

That is just a taste; there is more here.  Thank you Margaret Atwood.  I already loved you, but it is nice to have you join my fight.

Even if you don't plan to read Dr. Sleep, read this review. I promise, you will learn a lot about the appeal of horror. And, that information can only help you to help your patrons, especially as Halloween draws near.

Article on Stephen King's Family of Writers

I make no bones about the fact that I love Joe Hill.  Click here or here if this is somehow news to you.

I have also said, in a published book, that Stephen King is one of our greatest living storytellers.

I know I am not alone on either of these 2 opinions as there is a lengthy NY Times magazine article, just posted today, that looks at the King family in depth.  Yes there are childhood reminiscences and great family photos here, but what the feature also ponders is how Stephen and Tabitha King fostered the next generation of novelists.  It is very rare for a great writer to have kids who are also so talented.

If you like reading and storytelling or if you just want to see a normal, happy, non-dysfunctional family profiled for a change [hey, they might write about some messed up folks in their books, but they are pretty normal people], click here.

The Story Coaster Graphic

 

From the NY Times Book Review back page by Grant Snider, an illustrator and cartoonist, draws the weekly online strip “Incidental Comics.”

NYT Notable Books Now Available Online

Sorry so late with today's post.  I spent the morning planning the Spring semester with Joyce and the afternoon agonizing over my personal choices of the 10 best books I read this year.

I hope to have 3 reviews spread out over the two blogs tomorrow-- I also worked on those today, they just aren't ready for posting yet.

In the meantime, the 100 Notable Books of 2012 is up on the New York Times website.  Have a look.

And here is Flavorwire's response listing 25 books they feel were left off the list.

If you are really into seeing all of the best books, Largehearted Boy keeps the most comprehensive list.

OMG! Gone Girl Moves Up To #1

I cannot believe our luck here at the BPL, but after being out for a month, Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn moves up to Number 1 on The New York Times Best Seller List.

Email ra[at]berwynlibrary[dot]org to get on the wait list while you still have a chance to see the Number 1 best selling author in an intimate setting at 7pm on 7/11.

Oh, and you can meet me. Exciting, I know.

I will be the one asking the famous, talented author questions.  I will also have my book for sale and will be signing them, but I totally understand if you pass on the librarian textbook and instead buy Flynn's fabulous psychological suspense novels.

Either way, The Book Table will be there selling them all.

Haruki Murakami Bingo

We have hung this up at work, and then someone mentioned that I should post it for those of you who missed it.

This was in the NY Times Book Review over the weekend.

I am currently reading 1Q84 and working on an update to my Read Alike article on Murakami on NoveList, so I found this particularly amusing.

Audiobook Essay

I was catching up on by backlog of NY Times Book Reviews and I saw this essay by John Schwartz about his love of audiobooks.

2 things I want to point out about his essay.

1. Schwartz mentions how awesome Ready Player One is to listen to.  I also commented on this in my review.  Seriously, if you only ever try 1 audiobook, this is the one to go for.  I can't imagine a better way to experience this book.  Schwartz talked to Cline about it for his essay and Cline agrees that Wheaton's narration made his novel better.
2. Schwartz mentions how he listens to audiobooks while exercising and how that equates to about 7 hours a week--way more than he spends reading print.  I second this.  I listen while exercising and cleaning the house--especially when I am doing dishes, laundry and vacuuming-- all things I cannot do while reading.  In fact, my house is probably only as clean as it is because I get to "read" while cleaning and straightening.  But it also means I listen to a book at least 20 hours a week. That's a lot of reading.

I am still surprised by the number of avid reads who I encounter who systematically dismiss audiobooks as not for them.  If you are one of these people, give an audiobook a try, or at the very least, read Schwartz's essay.  It is bound to inspire you.  In fact, if you read the essay, you will see which best selling author Schwartz inspired to become, "a new convert to the power of auiodbooks."

Also, if you ever want to listen to a sample of any audiobook, click on over to Audible.com.  They have the easiest interface to search for and listen to excerpts. Yes, it is own by Amazon, but I didn't say you had to buy anything.  Just use them for their free excerpts and customer reviews.

Writers Ponder America and Its Role in Global Political Culture

Back on April 29th, The New York Times published a special op-ed section with this intro:

From April 30 to May 6, 100 writers from 25 countries will be in New York for a festival sponsored by the PEN American Center.

As part of the festival, A. O. Scott, a critic for The New York Times, will talk with the writers Martin Amis, Margaret Atwood and E. L. Doctorow at a Times Talk event on May 2, co-sponsored by the Consulate General of Canada in New York.

We asked those three writers — Ms. Atwood from Canada, Mr. Amis from Britain and Mr. Doctorow from the United States — to consider the question of America and its role in global political culture. Here are their answers.

I admire these three authors for their fiction, but I wasn't so sure about what they would have to say about this issue.  I think their thoughts are worth passing on.  I did not notice these essays linked anywhere else, so I am passing them on:

• Click here for Atwood
• Click here for Doctorow
• Click here for Amis

Personally, I am partial to Ms. Atwood's essay mostly because she said in order to understand America you need to read Hawthorne and Melville (my top 2 favorite authors ever!)

Author Blurbs Revisited and RA Training Opportunities

Last year, I posted here about how to use the blurbs one author gives to another author as a tool to help readers.  In fact, I use "blurbs" quite often at the desk when I am helping readers.

Again, read this post where I go into exact detail on how I use blurbs as an RA tool.  I don't want to repeat myself.

I am not the only one out there contemplating the place of the author blurb in today's literary landscape.  The New York Times is currently running a very interesting discussion entitled, "The Quandary of the Book Blurb."  The series includes essays by bestselling author Stephen King, author and editor Sophfronia Scott, journalist and novelist Bill Morris, and literary agent Sharon Bowers.  Together, the 4 essays cover every aspect of the blurb and how it can help or hinder authors and/or book sales. There is also a place for your comments as part of this discussion.

I feel that the author blurb is an important resource for helping readers, one which is often forgotten about.  Reading these essays from the author, reviewer, and agent side of the issue will help you to understand how and if you can use these blurbs to help your readers find their next good read.

I am all about using "outside the box resources," a category into which I place author blurbs.  As readers become more savvy about finding their own readalikes, especially with the popularity of sites like GoodReads (where readers are already having intelligent and useful conversations about their reading), librarians who help leisure readers need to make sure we are using the wealth of information and resources available to us as efficiently and effectively as we can. We need to make out training and expertise count.

We need to stand out as an invaluable resource to our patrons, not only because we have the books there for free checkout, but because our knowledge and assistance enhances their reading experience.

Which leads me to...well...me.  I can come out to your library or conference to help you to close the training gap with your staff.  I am currently booked through the summer but am beginning to schedule appearances starting in Fall 2012 (after August 21).  Click here for more information.

I will also be appearing at the PLA conference next week (more details in the coming days).  For a full list of all RA related programming at PLA, use the handy link from my friends at Reader's Advisor Online.