- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostFree Stuff Fridays
- Next Post »Wide Open Are Your Hands
On Endorsements
- 02/06/10
- 43
One of the strange things that happens when you write a book is that other authors begin to ask you if you would endorse their own book. There is a strange little economy whereby people in a particular genre all endorse one another's books. This is true in the Christian world as it's true for books about history, politics, and the like. A relatively small group of people pass their books around with requests for endorsements.
I've written quite a few of these little blurbs lately. It is something I'm generally quite eager to do and even honored to do. There is a certain sense in which it is humbling to have someone ask if you'd put your name on their book, offering it a stamp of approval. Yet there is also a certain danger to it, knowing that if you do not read the book carefully, you may later be accused of endorsing a book with a potentially serious theological error in it. Stranger things have happened. What is more nerve-racking still is that you may well be endorsing a manuscript that will be edited after you've submitted your endorsement, meaning that the content going to print may be quite different from the content you've put your name to.
Different authors have different standards when it comes to writing endorsements. Some go sight-unseen, endorsing a friend's book without even really reading the content. He knows his friend, he knows his theological position, and on that basis he will write an endorsement even without looking through the manuscript. Other authors are exacting, reading very carefully to ensure that every statement is as precise as it ought to be and even pushing back a little bit, asking the author to make necessary changes before they will put their name to an endorsement. Still other authors may just skim through the manuscript, looking for potential problem areas and reading those quickly even while racing through the rest.
When I began to write endorsements, I was very much in the middle camp--I would read every word of every sentence and would do so carefully. This is what I was most comfortable with, both for sake of conscience and credibility. I wanted to endorse only really good books and ones that were free of any theological error or weakness. As time has gone on, though, I've found myself spanning the middle camp and the final one. I have found that not every book easily lends itself to a thorough reading (such as a book of written prayers) and not every book depends upon theological precision (such as a biography). And so my early idealism has been undone just a little bit. And yet strangely this occasionally nags at my conscience. Somehow I feel that I cannot rightly write a convicting endorsement without having read every word. And yet if I were to read every word, I could not write more than the very, very occasional endorsement due to the time it would take to read the manuscripts so carefully. I have no desire to be the guy whose name is on every book; at the same time, I do like to say "yes" to these requests when I feel it would be helpful to the author.
At this point I want to ask you, when you read an endorsement, do you suppose that the author has pored over every word? Do you read these blurbs as blanket endorsements of the content, or do you see them as something less significant than that. Realistically, if you were to write endorsements, what camp would you be in?
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I write books and blogs for fun while doing web design and consulting for a living. I worship and serve at 
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
Comments (43)
I have never been asked to write an endorsement (and can't imagine that I ever will be), but . . . I think I would be careful to read the book in it's entirety being careful about that to which I have "attached" my name.
This is the process I use when parents, teachers, Christian school administrators ask me about a particular book - I don't recommend a book I haven't read, but if appropriate, I will say that I have written other things that the author has written and give a "qualified" recommendation.
When I see/read an endorsement, I am making the assumption that the writer of the endorsement has read the book - CAREFULLY. I view an endorsement as a recommendation of content - and have purchased/not purchased/read/not read a book based on the endorsement blurbs.
Given that I will never be asked to give a blurb for a book, I could easily claim to support the middle approach. However, when I think about books I have recommended to friends and for Sunday School classes, I am mostly of the third category. Typically, I have read the book and found it Biblical and edifying, but have not studied it in detail. Occasionally, I have endorsed a book to friends based on a partial read or merely the author.
My expectation for most book endorsements is that the endorser has read the book and finds is of high theological, Biblical, and literary quality. That does not require agreement on every minor point.
I dislike published book endorsements based on author alone.
I don't automatically assume the endorser has read every word in a book. I do assume they understand, generally, the content of the book. Neither do I see them as a blanket endorsement of the content of a book, just that they found the book generally helpful.
Can I say that I've never bought a book based on it's endorsements? I've bought books based on reviews, but not endorsements.
Sadly I have reached the point with most Christian books that I don't really care who has endorsed it because endorsing seems to have become purely a form of currency amongst authors and is an indication of the quality of friendship and not the quality of content. There are many names that appear on many books of people who must fall in your first camp and that strikes me as dishonest and arrogant; dishonest because they are nit genuinely able to say "it was a good read", and arrogant because they have assumed that just because they've included their name on the cover that I'll buy it...
Maybe I'm just a cynical Brit!
I rarely expect that an endorser has read every word...skimming is more like it. I also rarely read endorsements. I don't particularly care who says what about the book; I'd rather decide that for myself :)Unless, of course, the endorsement encompasses more than 2-3 sentences. If it is detailed and long-ish, then I'll read the endorsement expecting that that person has actually spent some time with the book and has some specific things to point out.I guess it all depends on what kind of endorsements you're writing :)
The endorsement is there because the publisher wants you to identify the author and his/her writing with another known author and his/her writing. If you like "A" then you will like "B". It's there to sell the book. To claim that a reader is not influenced by who is endorsing the book, or to claim that the image of an endorser is not associated with the content of the book s/he is endorsing, is incongruent with why the endorsement is sought to be put there. It definitely alters how much influence I allow the book to have on me if I trust (or don't trust) who is endorsing it.
Like Rebecca, I tend to assume that the person endorsing at least has a good idea of the content of the book. I ignore endorsements that talk about the author him- or herself, rather than the book, though.
All that said, I've never purchased a book specifically because of an endorsement, but I have avoided books because of who has endorsed them.
Verses that ascribe some degree of blame to the person even unintentionally promoting error (such as 1 Tim 5:22 and 2 John 10-11) would make me want to thoroughly review something I was endorsing in such an overt way.
That said, it probably depends on what you say. I've read *many* endorsements that say something like "This is the best book about Jesus I have ever read, probably the best book about Jesus in the whole century." (That's a quote from an actual endorsement.) Being that effusive would certainly require a very detailed read--but still probably says more about the endorser's discernment than the endorsee's work. You can speak with appropriate caution (as you did in your link to ChurchWorksMedia.com yesterday--thank you!) without knowing a great deal about the person or work, but few endorsements use such caution.
I'd say endorse only what you can really endorse--both for your readers' sake and your reputation's sake. I agree with your conscience. :)
I have been working through the same thing myself and the same sort of progression. I am in about the same place as you.
In my limited experience, I read much of the book very carefully. In the last month, I did an endorsement for Paul Tripp's new book and I was so blessed to read it - - one of the best marriage books I have ever read. I read some parts so closely - - in fact, I was retyping them to use as blog posts.
This was also the case with Sam Storm's new books on 2 Corinthians, which are just the sort of reading that I hope the people in my congregation will do.
I also think makes a difference how well you know the author. For example, with Paul Tripp and Sam Storm, I have confidence going in that I know their theology.
But, for a relative unknown - - say myself - - then those who endorse have to really be on the lookout for some theological wrinkle. I think of the N.T. Wright / Steve Chalke episode.
I don't buy books based on endorsements but do glance at them. I would feel gypped if I knew someone had endorsed a book without reading it! I do not expect the endorser to agree with every single detail, but even casual reading should reveal any major flaws.
Doctrinal correctness is only part of an endorsement, in my opinion. A book can be theologically sound and still be poorly written or flatly boring. Or a book can be "right" but off-focus or not particularly edifying. Lots of authors have dud books now and then. We humans are quite capable of writing accurate books that lack the breath of the Spirit. We need both the Spirit and truth. Correct content or respectable author does not equal a good book, and I expect endorsements to reflect both aspects....
I think I probably expect too much, which is why I don't pay a whole lot of attention to endorsements but rely on a quick skim myself. ;)
Endorsements are like job references and just about as trustworthy. Whether they have read the book or not wouldn't change a thing. No one is going to get one from someone who is going to trash it or who thinks you're a moron. If you read it or not if you say something negative it will never make it to the endorsement page. I would be very tempted to buy any book that was endorsed by someone who opposed the view promoted by the book but said that the argument was worth considering. Packer seems to endorse books for a living but that at least says something about the book's orthodoxy. I am sure he wouldn't endorse a piece of heresy. "My good friend" endorsements are a complete waste of time and certain evangelicals seem to be scrambling to say good things about each other on the back of books. Makes me not want to read it.The best endorsement is being allowed to read a few pages either in the store or on the web site.
I think of an endorsement in the same way I think of someone asking for my approval in the work environment.
The better I know the person, the more I may trust their judgment, and the less information I will need to give my approval.
If I don't know the person very well, or if I am unsure of how much trust I can place in their work, I will want more information in order to give my approval.
Anytime I give an approval without all of the information I have to understand that I am taking a risk in trusting that person. So the question I have to ask myself is "Am I willing to take this amount of risk with this person in this situation?"
If I were asked to give a book endorsement, I would approach it in the same way I would if I were asked to sign my name to approve a request at work. In both cases the credibility of my judgment is involved.
I consider the same to be true of those who give book endorsements. As an example, I did not know who Eugene Peterson was prior to reading his endorsement on the front cover of the "The Shack". Based upon his endorsement of this book, I will severely question his judgment anytime I come across his work in the future.
I would take care when I give my formal approval. When a person gives their formal approval, it is a challlenge to undo it.
I think of an endorsement in the same way I think of someone asking for my approval in the work environment.
The better I know the person, the more I may trust their judgment, and the less information I will need to give my approval.
If I don't know the person very well, or if I am unsure of how much trust I can place in their work, I will want more information in order to give my approval.
Anytime I give an approval without all of the information I have to understand that I am taking a risk in trusting that person. So the question I have to ask myself is "Am I willing to take this amount of risk with this person in this situation?"
If I were asked to give a book endorsement, I would approach it in the same way I would if I were asked to sign my name to approve a request at work. In both cases the credibility of my judgment is involved.
I consider the same to be true of those who give book endorsements. As an example, I did not know who Eugene Peterson was prior to reading his endorsement on the front cover of the "The Shack". Based upon his endorsement of this book, I will severely question his judgment anytime I come across his work in the future.
I would take care when I give my formal approval. When a person gives their formal approval, it is a challlenge to undo it.
Thanks for the clarification between "reviews" and "endorsements."Call it what you will, but I've always held the belief that an "endorsement" on Christian material in particular meant that the person making it, "thoroughly" read the book and was in agreement with all that he read. I make this distinction with non-Christian material because I've always assumed that there was less of a "thoroughness" to those endorsements and slightly questionable motives supporting the endorsement.In dealing with "reviews" the position is different in that it permits the person making it to cite specifically where they are in agreement and where they are not. Very matter of factly, much of Tim's reviews are of this nature..."this I agree with"..."this, not so much."
I always look at a books endorsements - it is an important part of determining if the book is worth my time or not - especially for authors whom I do not know.
My father has written a few books and endorsed hundreds. Most of those books were not available for him to read, or he wasn't able to read it before he endorsed it. I remember seeing John MacArthur at Dr. Mohler's house after a T4g meeting - he had a huge aviator's case full of book manuscripts. He said everywhere he goes he fills it up with books people want him to endorse. I know my father is an honest man, full of integrity, and I believe the same about Dr. Mac. But there is no way they can read all these books along with the ones they want and truly need to read. I suspect that they skim, looking for the good points and for errors, but generally endorse for men they already trust.
Let's not forget the social factor here as well. What if Ligon Duncan asked Mohler to endorse a book that included some paedobaptistic theology? Is Mohler just going to reject him? He is probably not asking him to endorse that view, just the scholarship of the book and the man. So if one sees covenant theology in a Duncan book endorsed by Mohler, he or she probably not going to think that Mohler endorses each and every word of the book, more the man.
So I take an endorsement to be more of and endorsement for the man, his character, and his skill to write such a book - not that the endorser agrees with everything in it.
I've have the impression that the person who wrote the endorsement has carefully read the book. This especially happens if I read a particular author for the first time—I don't know him, but I know the person who vouched for him. In which case, I will most likely read the book.
I think I'll be long to the camp where I would discern each statement before endorsing. I would especially be careful if I had a degree of popularity or influence over the others. An endorsement, after all, is almost like an approval.
I have always assumed that if I saw a man's (or woman's) name on a book it meant that he (or she) had actually read it and is in full agreement with the content. I guess now I will be more careful not to assume. However, It does make perfect sense to think that the reader should exercise biblical discernment and not rely on an endorsement. Endorsements are very helpful to me in choosing which books I read, but I will stop and think and put them in their proper place. Thank you for causing me to think about this!
Probably a stupid question, but here goes:
Is there ever remuneration given for endorsements, or is always a gratis thing?
I only endorse books--either by blurb or by blog--that I know in my heart I believe people will be better off having read. I may not agree with every theological position held by the author or put forth in the book. But generally I know the person well; if I don't, then either I know someone that knows the person well or I know enough about the person from other sources to be confident in the resource.
If I know the person well, I may skim it and be more forgiving of ambiguity--you can't explain every theological premise in detail in every book, and some false assumptions on the part of a reader are unavoidable--knowing that if someone reads other works of the author they will get an increasingly accurate view of God. If I know the person by reputation or a friend of a friend, I will likely read it first and gain some understanding of their theological underpinings. They don't have to agree with me on peripheral matters but must agree on essentials, and not promote any of the false gospels that are appearing more and more on church bookshelves.
I do consider endorsements when I am considering reviewing or purchasing a book. It gives me some insight into the author's background and theological foundation, and if someone I highly respect recommends a book, I will be more inclined to read it. I do not assume, however, that they have necessarily read each and every word and agree with it 100%. I would, however, like to believe that anyone who endorses the book does so because overall they support the author's ministry and agree with most of the points made in the book.
I take endorsements pretty seriously. In legal terms, to endorse something means to take liability for it. If I'm going to put my name on something and say I'm liable for it, then I want to make absolutely sure that I would be willing to take full responsibility for everything contained in it.
Recommendations, on the other hand, are quite different. It's one of the things I like best about the "Discerning Reader" site, your 10MillionWords blog. A recommendation means that the reader may enjoy or learn from a book, whether or not the reviewer necessarily agrees with its content.
When I write book reviews, I recommend many books, but I endorse very few. Oftentimes, I will even recommend books with which I strongly disagree with the author, if it is well-written and presents its arguments well. I believe that we have much to learn from those with whom we disagree, but I will state in my review where the author differs from my own position. I believe you do this as well, which I appreciate.
I think the middle camp is a good camp. As an author, I would appreciate such an endorsement. As an affiliate for Terry Dean's Christian Financial Freedom, I use this approach.
Being a student who is required to read more than I can read in detail, I understand your predicament. I hardly read endorsements, but I almost always check who is endorsing a book. For me it is simply a way, in a general sense, of positioning a book on the spectrum of views that exist.
There are authors whose endorsements I respect, and they make me more likely to buy a book, but that does not mean I expect them to read every word of a book they endorse.
I disagree with those who are relating an endorsement to a job reference. An endorsement is using your foreknowledge of the person referencing to influence your decision. You usually do not have foreknowledge of a person offering a job reference; they are an unknown to you.
i usually think that if a person has endorsed a book, he or she must have read it.
endorsements influence my buying sometimes. if i see a bunch of names of people i enjoy reading/listening to/respect and they all give glowing reviews, that's a pretty strong pull for me.
i'd say if you're going to endorse a book, read the whole thing and be honest in your blurb. you're known and trusted as a good reviewer tim; your endorsements actually matter.
I guess there is a sense where all of us endorse books preachers etc to our friends albeit in an informal way compared to the subject of the post. Personally I feel not only should the book be carefully read but also any other books or statements the author may have written.ie a particular book may be aok but it may lead the reader to other books that are off -track
I no longer assume that every endorser has even skimmed the book, but I think an endorser should be honest. One who says he thinks this book will be a blessing to new believers may not have read every word. One who says the book "hooked me from start to finish" should have read it all.
Fairly often I decide NOT to read a book based on who has endorsed it. If it's endorsed by the shallowest people, I don't expect the book to have anything solid. One thing that strikes me favorably is when a non-theology book is endorsed by people I wouldn't expect to agree with each other. I have one book endorsed by Mike Wallace, Billy Graham and the first US Ambassador to China; another endorsed by Ron Sider and Jack Hayford; another endorsed by Joseph Stowell and David Wilkerson. When the book's endorsed by people from different camps, I figure it's probably got something that's interesting or useful or both.
I see them as saying that the book is worth reading... worth my time, money, whatever: overall, just a good book! And of course whatever else they specifically say in the actual blurb.
I believe that if you're being asked to indorse the book, do just that. Read the book. If the content of the book moves you, write a moving and compelling endorsement. If the book doesn't move you, or if you haven't read enough of the book to give an informed opinion (about this particular book), be honest about it.
However, if you are being asked to indorse the author, his or her thoughts and/or theology, then you don't necessarily need to read the book. If you are doing this, then you need to be specific as to what you're endorsing, so that your endorsing of the author isn't a veiled endorsing of the book that you haven't read.
@ Ken (11):
you said you didn't think packer would endorse heresy; i would have to disagree. i rather like packer and have benefited from his writings, but i must say that his endorsement of roman catholic peter kreeft's heretical hyper-ecumenical piece entitled Ecumenical Jihad shocked me. in the book, Kreeft explains an out of body experience where he was taken to heaven and met with confucius, mohammed, and even sincere atheists who were looking for truth. kreeft then spews out more and more heresy, but packer endorsed him anyway. colson also endorsed this book, but that didn't suprise me as much as packer.
tim, what are we as concerned readers supposed to do with men like packer who endorse books like this (not to mention the entire ect deal). i'm a young guy who wants to get the gospel right and not dilute/distort it just so everyone can get along.
Yes, Tim, I will endorse your next book. But I will read every word and push back if I need to before offering a glowing recommendation! My name will sell at least a dozen copies, so you should really do all you can to keep me happy!
I think I would just read the book and the book itself would dictate the camp I fell into. Some books would lend themselves to a thorough examination of the meaning or theology. Some would merely be based on the entertainment value of the book. Some would fall somewhere in the middle.
I know when I wrote my book (www.readtheletters.com), I received all kinds of endorsements from all kinds of people from all distances of relationship, and as such, they all read it with a different perspective or flair. And, this was evident in their words. I think readers like these different takes.
Personally, I think it depends on the book itself, and you follow the lead of the writing found in the book.
Tim, will you endorse my book?
Thanks,
Sean Hanzelikwww.oneheartoneflesh.com
I just assume that most major authors who are asked to do a lot of endorsements just skim through the book if they read it at all. This is what I'm hoping happened with Peterson's endorsement of the Shack, and Packer's endorsement of Godology.
I've been asked to endorse a number of books. I either say, "I really don't have time," or, I take the time to read every word and to craft very carefully my endorsement. Of course, I've not been asked endorse a 1000-page commentary--I imagine in that case I would take your "middle road."
I buy and read a lot of books, and while the endorsements most likely are not going to change my decision to buy or not buy, I do find it quite helpful to know what other authors endorse the particular book. I like to have a general sense of what the endorsing authors liked about the book and to see who the endorsing authors are. Sometimes, if all of the endorsing authors are guys from the same denomination or some very tight camp/school of thought, I will proceed with caution. This can often signal either more of the same 'group think' or it could point to the good ole boys club of backwashing. Not always. But I do look for it.
Finally, I don't necessarily think that every single word must be thoroughly scrutinized in order to provide a decent endorsement, but I do hope for at least more than a skim job. On the one hand, I would like to think that at least the scholarship and all of the major themes/ theses proposed in the book are orthodox, above board, reliable, Biblical, etc. But on the other hand, I don't necessarily think that we need to know that the endorser questions the use of a quote on pg. 172 in paragraph 3 which references a prayer made by a mystic theologian from the middle ages, or something of that uber detailed nature, unless it pertains negatively to the overarching meaning of the text in some way.
Hope that helps! Deb
I work in a Christian ministry where the main speaker gets frequent requests for endorsements. We receive requests for anything from children's coloring books to thick tomes, and it is my job to process all of the requests. The speaker has very high standards for endorsements: they must have a professional publisher; they must be on topics relevant to our ministry; they must have a completed manuscript. And if they meet all these criteria, then the book goes through an extensive review process with an internal advisory panel before she even reads the manuscript herself. Hence, she endorses very few books, simply for the time it takes to go through this entire process. But I know that when she does endorse a book, it will be a compelling, well-written, relevant book to our constituents. I appreciate that level of integrity.
Now that I see how intense her process is, I am more aware of endorsements that I see on books. When there are some Christian leaders that I see endorsing dozens of books in a short period of time, I realize that they probably aren't really reading all those books, and my confidence in their endorsement goes down. :)
I do not feel it's ethical to endorse something that has not been read completely. Not skimming, but I don't necessarily mean checking every reference and looking at the Greek. Reading it with the thoroughness you'd expect a reader to. If you're tying your name to it, you need to be sure that it's something you want associated with and that you don't lead others astray. Verses posted above are very relevant.
If I see your endorsement I assume that if I ran into you and talked to you about the book, you'd have read the book with at least the same focus you expect me to give it. If it's a book of prayers, I'd skim through...picking here and there. If it's a theology book, I'd read every single page. How can you tell me that you endorse what you've never even read as you expect me to read?
When someone goes to a movie and tells me it's great...I really am thinking they've actually seen it. If they mean they heard it's good, say that: "Other people seem to really like it and I love that actor." But to endorse it yourself? You've got to see it. I don't see books any differently.
I keep thinking about Eugene Peterson and the Shack. Did he really read it? All the way through? Did he think about the picture of God given in the book? Didn't he at least think about the opposition that might come to what was written? How do you know what qualifications to give the endorsement if you've merely skimmed?
I would never endorse a book that I had not read--even if I knew the author and could trust that his or theology was sound.
A friend of mine once endorsed a book based on knowing the author and trusting that the book would be great. It was (and is) a great book. However, my friend was quite chagrined when he actually got around to reading the book and realized that his endorsement just didn't "fit" with the content of the book.
He vowed after that experience to only endorse books that he had carefully read---and I learned from his example well before I was ever invited by a publisher/author to provide an endorsement.
When deciding on whether to purchase a book written by an unknown (to me) author, I often base my decision on the authors who endorse the particular title. If I trust the writers who have endorsed it, I may very well purchase the book. For this reason, I think that it is important that someone giving an endorsement should have read the entire book first.
I may have been influenced slightly to buy a book based on who has endorsed it but I think that I have decided a lot more often to NOT buy a book based on it's endorsements. I usually am most motivated by the title, sub-title and author. If it's a known and trusted author I rarely care who has endorsed it. But if it's an unknown title or author, or if the subject matter is something that I am not very familiar with, I do usually read the back cover, the author's bio and then head straight for the endorsements to see who has given their stamp of approval. If there are names like Joel Osteen, Kenneth Copeland, Crefflo Dollar, or Doug Pagitt I am most likely to put the book back on the shelf and not even give it the time of day because I know I have no desire to read or be influenced by known un-faithfuls. So I would say that I am more influenced to not buy a book based on who endorsed it than I am to buy a book based on who endorsed it.
If you are going to endorse a book then it makes sense that you will have to take the time to read it carefully and give a good review (with full knowledge of what is contained in the book). It seems to me that this approach would limit the number of books that you can endorse, however, your endorsement will be worth more.
Tim, I trust you and I trust your word. That's because I've been reading your reviews for some time now. And not only that, I've been reading the books you've reviewed and coming to similar conclusions. I want to know that you actually commend the book. Read the whole thing, brother. It means fewer endorsements, yes, but it also means more meaningful endorsements. That's my two cents.
This is a very interesting question, and one which I've never really considered. I've always assumed that author endorsements - for theological books, at least - are based on detailed examination of the content. And while I can't definitively say that I've purchased a book based on endorsements (though I probably have), I know that I have read books based on that criteria.
Take a book like "Deep Church": there was much ado surrounding that book's blurbs, because they came from all over the theological spectrum. If I am to assume that very few of those blurbers (hey, new word!) held the text to a high standard, then why should I care? But if they closely examined the content and still offered their endorsement, then the critical consensus becomes far more meaningful.
All that said, my general assumption is this: if you truly value a book that you've read, then you will probably write a review or offer a lengthier endorsement on your blog. And as one who seeks out in-depth reviews, this will mean more to me than a blurb. But if you're willing to endorse - to put your name on - someone else's product/book/idea/ministry tool, then I hope you've considered it carefully.