England’s New Book Society

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 636, 12 April 1929, Page 14

England’s New Book Society

In a recent article in "The Man- [ i .'tester Guardian." Mr Allan Monkhouse discussed the huge literary output of 1928 and went on to refer to the probable effect, in 1929. of the "Book Society,” recently formed in England , n the lines of the "Book of the Month Club ” and similar clubs in America. Mr Hugh Walpole is the chairman of the selection committee, and the other members of it are Miss Cleinence Dane, Mrs Sylvia Lynd. Mr 1. B. Priestley, and Professor Gordon, president of Magdalen College, Oxford. Mr Monkhouse comments as follows’.— PERHAPS 1»29 -Will be memorable as the year in which the “Book Society” was launched in England. It is, of course, an imitation of the societies or clubs that have been so successful in America. The effect of these seems to he a kind of mass production; the ideal is that everybody should read the same books. America Is for mass production, for keeping in step, for shouting the same thing at the same time. As to the Book Society, there may be a point of view that does not occur to me and it may have results different from anything 1 can anticipate; but I cannot see the need for it, and I think it is likely to do more harm than good. If you join the society you will get expert advice as to what you should read. Of course you will all get the same advice. It is no good joining the society unless you take the advice, so if there are 50,000 of you—as there may be—you •will buy 50,000 (says 45,000 if you like) of A’s book. The unfortunate B is (let us say) 2 per cent, behind A in the estimation of the eminent judges. Other judges, equally eminent, would have put his book 5 per cent, above A’g. But instead of selling 50,000 he sells 2000. This seems to me unfair. It is, I admit, an unfair world, but we need not work to make it worse than it is. If by this arbitrary recommendation you boom a book into sales of 50,000 when, in present circumstances, the sales would be 2000, you divert sales of 48,000 books. From what? Largely from the books of meritorious and individual writers who now And it not too easy to get their books published. Reading will not be increased; it will only be diverted. The best books of the future are to come from those who are now struggling below the line of easy publicity. Are these the people that the Book Society means to help? They may mean to do it, but they won’t. They will pick out one now and then, but generally they will be ever strong upon the stronger side. They will help those who are capable of helping themselves. The good, individual, faithful writers who do not appeal to them will lose even that which they have. The work which the society would do is already done efficiently and sufficiently by reviewers. Their various opinions—for, of course, they don’t all jump together—help to keep the proportions fairly right. The Book Society will throw them all wrong. Good work will never get a chance; other good work will be rewarded out of proportion to its merits. If the members of the society cannot find out what books to read without the assistance of its Judges they are not fit to appreciate the books recommended. Of course these judges are very admirable persons, but they would be the first to agree that many other groups could be found to do the work equally well; the point is that these would do it with different results. But I cannot understand how Mr Walpole and his colleagues can do the work without the loss of a great part of their own considerable contributions to literature. They surely cannot pretend to

select one book without reading 20, unless they confine themselves to established reputations and the recommendations of publishers. I hope that the society will bs a failure, but I am afraid that it will not. It appeals too surely to those who like advertisement, publicity, uniformity and fuss.