Guidelines for Book Reviewers-A +A
Critical Studies in Television seeks to publish incisive and insightful book reviews which provide information about the book for the reader while also offering informed criticism of the book's content. Without wishing to be prescriptive, and acknowledging that the form of the review may vary according to the subject matter of the book, reviewers are encouraged to include the following in their reviews:
1.An introduction locating the book within a particular critical/generic/historical or other context, making reference to comparable books.
2.An outline of the content of the book, not necessarily chapter by chapter, although reviewers are welcome to adopt this approach if it seems appropriate.
3.A critical assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the book.
4.An assessment of the contribution the book makes to Television Studies in general and/or to the specific area, discipline or genre within which the book might be located.
Formatting and Style
Please include the following information at the top of the review:
Author(s)/Editor(s), Full title including sub-title (in italics), Publisher, year. ISBN.
Reviews should be typed in double spacing. Please do not justify the margins of your text, align to the left. New paragraphs should be indented.
Reviews should normally be 800-1500 words in length unless the review is considering more than one book, in which case an increased wordage may be acceptable (please consult with the Book Review Editor if uncertain). Please print a word count at the end of the manuscript.
Language and Spelling
Reviews should be written in English and should observe current British rather than American spelling conventions (e.g. centre rather than center; organisation rather than organization). If in doubt, please check the spelling and grammar of your review electronically (in Microsoft Word, choose the 'English (U.K.)' option).
Quotes should be in single quotation marks except where a quote is longer than fifty words, when it should be indented in a separate paragraph. Quotes from the work under review should always be followed immediately by page numbers in parentheses, e.g. (p.33).
Notes and References
Notes should be avoided or kept to a minimum (they can often be taken into the text itself, sometimes in brackets). If notes are deemed necessary they should be placed at the end of the review as endnotes, rather than footnotes (see reviews in previous issues of CST for an indication of how to list notes and references).
Robin Nelson, TV Drama in Transition, Macmillan, 1997. (If mentioned immediately after, ibid; and thereafter, Nelson, TV Drama in Transition, pp. nos.)
Article in edited collection
Stuart Hall, 'Encoding/Decoding,' in Stuart Hall, Dorothy Hobson, Andrew Lowe, Paul Willis, eds, Culture, Media, Language, Hutchinson, 1980, pp.128-138.
Article in collection already mentioned
David Morley, 'Texts, Readers, Subjects,' Hall, Hobson, Lowe and Willis, eds., Culture, Media, Language, pp.163-173.
Laura Mulvey, 'Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema', Screen, 16, 3, 1975, 6-18.
Diana Negra, 'Quality Postfeminism? Sex and the Single Girl on HBO,' Genders Online, 39, 2004: http://www.genders.org/g39/g39_negra.html
Include at the end of the review, aligned to the right, with the reviewer's institution italicised on following line, e.g.
Manchester Metropolitan University
A brief biographical note about the reviewer should be supplied at the end of the review (including e-mail address).
Please submit book reviews electronically to Lez Cooke at L.J.Cooke@mmu.ac.uk
If e-mailing is not possible, then please send two copies to:
Critical Studies in Television
Book Review Editor
Department of Contemporary Arts
Manchester Metropolitan University
Authors should note that sending a review via post may cause delay in the reviewing process. Reviewers should retain one copy of their article on file.
User commentsComment on this post
Your comments will be moderated before being displayed above.