Abstract
A Note to JLD Readers: One year ago I agreed to conduct a monthly column reviewing contemporary classic books. In a preliminary column I outlined the characteristics of a classic. In the intervening months I have presented reviews of a number of books. Now I wish to notify JLD readers of a change in my review policy.
I shall select books on a topic of general interest, with some extraordinarily good or useful feature. At present I do not plan on pointing out deficiencies, as I see them. But if enough JLD readers protest, giving weighty and sufficient reasons, I may reconsider.
This change in my selection policy is motivated by several factors. One is standards. Either my standards are too high or I'm not seeing enough flaw-free books. Next is breadth of appeal. Suppose I read a particularly fine source book on the nervous system. How many JLD readers shall I assume will be interested? The final aspect is a set of interlocked assumptions on book reviews and book review readers. I have re-examined the set with which I began this series of reviews. Having concluded that some of the assumptions are no longer valid, if indeed they were ever valid, I shall assert three new premises. (1) Few objects are perfect. (2) Flawed objects have useful aspects. (3) Useful objects should be exposed to potential users. In this issue you will find the first of a new series of reviews. I shall be pleased to receive reader reactions and will reply as space and the Editor permit—M.S.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.