Reconsidering Book Reviews

Opportunities, not chores, for prospective writers (and a how-to!)

** The Harding Project just published ‘how-to write a book review.’ If you’re inspired by this article, check it out. **

Placing renewed emphasis on reviews could link the common encouragements to read more books and write more articles–aligning with battalion-level programs that incentivize writing and calls for physical libraries in unit headquarters. The invitation to a shorter, more focused book review might be a less daunting proposal than writing an original article.

Based on my experience with book reviews, I offer three suggestions related to starting up or revitalizing a book review program in the Army’s journals: 

1. Start with why. Reconfigure calls for submissions to specify which kind of writers are invited to review which kind of books, and address the purpose of the review.

2. Mix it up. Facilitate discussions and competitions centered around book reviews. Book reviews vary in format and scope, so there are many innovative ways to craft competitions around a singular book, subject matter, or strategic, political, or ethical question.

3. Make it worth the time and effort. Invite reviews of existing professional reading lists from senior leaders or schoolhouses, feature more essay-style reviews in print, and consider them if they are of a sufficient quality for recommended reading lists. 

Broadly, I suggest improving what already exists, not a complete overhaul.

Today’s book review in the Army’s journals

The seven that publish book reviews are diverse in their approach; there is much to be acknowledged and celebrated. Armor stands out both in quantity of reviews, and in its adherence to a traditional style: direct evaluations of a book in 650 words or less by a seasoned field grade or noncommissioned officer (for parallels, see Proceedings, Kirkus Reviews, or just about any academic journal in the humanities). Infantry has perhaps the strongest invitation, and as of the latest issue even offers books available for review.

Special Warfare and Aviation Digest seem to mirror the print edition of Military Review: each publish about one book review per issue, sometimes penned by a junior officer, provided that the review aligns with the theme of an issue and/or is particularly exemplary. It is difficult to tell if Special Warfare extends an invitation or chooses from a preexisting pool of submissions, while Aviation Digest leaves the book choice up to the author.

Applied Language Learning, The Army Lawyer, and The U.S. Army Chaplain Corps Journal each contain a relatively vibrant book review section; these entries read similar to standalone essays and are given a place of prominence in the table of contents, akin to The Strategy Bridge’s #Reviewing.

As far as I can tell, none of the branch journals contain the longer 3000-word review essay with an independent thesis and argument or synthesis of multiple books as is found at Modern War Institute or War on the Rocks – or if they do contain these, they appear as articles. 

Renewing your book review section

Currently ten Army branch journals lack book reviews altogether; this does not necessarily to change, but they could adapt the review for the future.¹ While generative artificial intelligence can help with literature reviews or summarizing books, the book review in the professional journal opens the door for junior leaders and aspiring writers. Book reviews teach and reward good reading habits: to retain and then thoughtfully rehearse another author’s argument before engaging that argument. Book reviews also help busy professionals screen which books are worth their time and provide tailored summaries for those books we wish we could get to.

For those ten Army journals without book reviews—or for the seven that want to refresh them, I expand on my initial three points below:

1. Starting with why. Beyond word count and the formatting of footnotes, what level of expertise is this journal looking for? Who might read the review and why should the writer attempt it? Is this review more of a professional service of evaluation, an expert analysis, a synthesis of ideas, a general book recommendation, or a product of a writing competition or workshop tool? Specifying these things gives writers and readers of the section a general idea of what they’re engaging with. 

2. Mixing it up. Stories and controversies are normally more compelling than brute facts. Whether the desired book review is a 650-word professional recommendation or a 3,000-word review essay, consider the freedoms: review roundtables co-written between multiple writers, reviews that focus on bibliographies, or entire professional reading lists. Or consider the following prompts: What book has made the greatest impact on you as a professional or leader and why? Is there a book on a professional reading list with which you passionately disagree, and if so, why? (This comes with risks, of course.) If a senior leader could read one book of your choosing, what would it be and what distinguishes it from other works? How does the book relate to lessons learned in your day-to-day work?

3. Making it worth the time and effort. Incentivizing can be as simple as receiving and distributing free books. Or the incentive can be tied into existing professional reading lists from senior leaders or schoolhouses, feature more essay-style reviews in print, or consideration them for recommended reading lists. It may be as simple as reformatting the table of contents so that book review authors are listed on the cover. 

Renew the book review

To conclude: whether a review program is robust or scant, whether the ideal reviews are 650-word scholarly evaluations or 3000-word reflection essays, whether the publication is drowning in submissions or struggling to get any quality work in the inbox, I believe book reviews represent an opportunity for organizations and journals to attract more writers in general or a particular kind of writer. Present book reviews as opportunities, not chores, to prospective writers.

1. Army Sustainment, Army Chemical Review, The Medical Journal, The Army Communicator, Military Police, Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin, Engineer, Air Defense Artillery, The Dental Corps Bulletin and Field Artillery.