Pick up the book you've chosen (I'm using book to represent any media). Flip through the pages and get an overall picture of what you've got.
Is your book readable? Does it have lots of professional jargon and wordiness which would make it too hard to understand? Usually, professional writings are more factually reliable than popular writings, but they're worthless if you can't understand them. Lots of times, I'll go to the kid's section of the library to get a basic understanding of a topic. Those kids books are often quite understandable, and, after looking through an old Golden series on American History, I realized if a student knew what these kids' books contained, they'd have no problem breezing through most college-level American History courses. What the kids' books have in readability is usually made up for in support, when reading more professional writings.
Professional writings are usually cluttered up with notes. These notes might be at the bottom of pages, or at the ends of chapters or other parts of the book. The notes tell the reader where the author got the information. It goes a long way in showing that what you're reading is reliable. Look, also, at the end of the book or chapter for a bibliography. That will give you another list of resources with which to pursue your study. If you like what you've got so far, you'll want to reference the book later. To do this, the book should have a complete and accurate index. I've run into many a history book which looks good in all the above respects, only to find that the page references in the index don't align to what the index claims.
If your book's language is readable, and the information looks like the author did his or her homework, you need to consider whether your book shows, or tells you what you want. (I'm opening myself up for Show-Me State jokes now. I live in Missouri.) It's not enough to be told that Columbus discovered America in 1492. That's a "telling" statement. Show me that he actually did it --prove it. If you do your homework better than the telling-author, you'll know that the Vikings found North America in 986 or even before, only to find that natives found it even earlier. There are lots of other guesses at who "discovered" America, and, most of 'em are only guesses. A telling author states a "fact" and you gotta believe it because he or she said so. A showing author makes a claim, then supports it. Go for the showing author. You've still gotta be careful, even if you've got a book full of notes, a big bibiography and accurate index. Who's the author?
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Paul Landkamer's Bibliophile topic, please visit the Discussions page.