It has been a hard, long winter here in America's heartland. But it seems, as the end of April is quickly approaching, that spring has finally arrived. And for that, I am quite thankful!
One of the great things about living somewhere where you can experience all four seasons is that you can be sure that no matter how long winter is, spring will come. For many, spring is a reminder of renewal and rebirth. You can see it in the plants and trees, and of course in the grass that once again needs to be mowed. But for me, this spring has also led to a rebirth in reviews of my book on Mainline Christianity. Last month I recounted the review that appeared in Lutheran Quarterly, but just this week--as I mark the two year anniversary of the publication of the Mainline, I am pleased to pass along that two more reviews have appeared!
The first is from Anglican & Episcopal History (Volume 83, March 2014). Full disclosure, the first scholarly article I ever published (on Indianapolis's Christ Church Cathedral and the 1960s) appeared in A&E History as did my very first (and several since) book reviews. The review for my book though was written by Justus D. Doenecke of the New College of Florida and is paired with David Hollinger's After Cloven Tongues of Fire. It rightly points out a few minor misspellings (the kinds of things even authors, editors, and spell check can miss), but also acknowledges (as some other reviews I think tend to miss) that not only does it talk of decline of the Old Mainline, but also "where we are now" (to borrow his phrase) including the emergence of the New Mainline. For that, I am indebted to Professor Doenecke.
Because I am on the book review distribution list for A&E History, I knew that my book had been sent to the editors and might be reviewed. As such, while I was surprised to see it in print, the surprise was one of not knowing if/when it would appear--not the surprise of not expecting it to possibly happen. That was not the case for the second review, however. One of the lessons I learned fairly early on in graduate school, about the same time that my first article appeared in A&E History was how fractured and specialized academia has become. There are so many journals, representing virtually every facet of every branch of every department that it is a daunting task to know them all. However, because there are so many journals, it also means that if you are an author, your book can end up getting reviewed in many different places -- including in journals you might not normally read. Such is the case for the second review of the Mainline that appeared this month, in the journal of the Religious Research Association, the Review of Religious Research (March 2014).
The review was written by John P. Marcum, who notes another point I hope other readers have picked up on -- that the book is intended to be a starting point, an overview, a means to launch further studies. He does take issue (perhaps the most pointed, though it is fairly argued) with the fact that I am an historian and did not spend (as I might have, had I been either trained differently or was coming at the topic from a different discipline) as much time as he would have liked utilizing "sociological research." But what I most appreciated about Marcum's lengthy review (all to often a rarity itself in academia -- where reviews are often capped at 500-750 words) was how he ended it. And so, I'll end this post by quoting his review:
"Notwithstanding such issues, there is much to appreciate in this book. It provides a useful, concise history of the American Mainline. Readers may want more details, or disagree with some arguments, but Mainline Christianity provides a thoughtful, reasoned, and focused overview of this fascinating segment of American religious life."
No comments:
Post a Comment