[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
October 1977

An Author Reviews a Reviewer-Reply

Arch Ophthalmol. 1977;95(10):1886. doi:10.1001/archopht.1977.04450100187029

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

In Reply.—Before responding to Dr Fox' letter concerning my review of his fifth edition of Ophthalmic Plastic Surgery, I will preface the answers to his criticisms of my book review with a few statements on my philosophy regarding book reviews.

If book reviews are to be meaningful, they must point out weaknesses, as well as strengths. I must admit that it would be easy to read the preface on each new book, and perhaps an additional chapter, and then write some laudatory comments. In this way one would make many friends. However, I can honestly say that I have read every page of each book that I have reviewed. Otherwise, I could not, in good conscience, either recommend or fault a book. It is obvious that some of the reviewer's prejudices will appear in any review, but these should be kept to a minimum. If book reviews are

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×