论文部分内容阅读
这里摘编的一束来信,都是对改进本刊质量提出宝贵意见的,情真意切,发人深省。今年本刊要紧紧围绕经济建设和改革开放这个中心来提高质量,并专门开辟“经济广角”专栏,主要意图已见于去年第6期卷首语和栏目设计方案。但从本期内容来看,关于服务于经济建设的应用类图书的评介,仍然是所见者寡。滞后原因固然与出书状况不无关系,但主要还是我们的书评组织工作行动迟缓。企盼出版界、书评界多多提供信息和文稿,协助我们备起直追,迎头赶上。书评界人才辈出,潜力无穷。仅从表刊的六年实践和全国书评学会举办的书评骨干培训班中已见端倪。迟迟没有形成一支书评队伍,原因也在于我们的组织工作滞后。今后我们除了继续珍视已经建立联系的老作者的深厚友谊,还将争取更多的专家、学者动笔撰写书评。欣赏大手笔写小文章,是本刊与众多读者的共同心愿。本刊提倡短文,一是希望在有限的篇幅内让更多的作者得到发言的机会,二是觉得短文往往能够抓到要害处。形式上甲乙丙丁,面面俱到,却往往淹没了新思想、新见解和主要价值所在,使人看不清所评著作的个性;短文虽然难以畅所欲言,但是倘能赞其一点,不及其余,或许宛若画龙点睛,颇为传神。与其言不及义,不如言不尽意,这是我们的初衷。当然,长与短,毕竟是形式问题,归根结底还要服从于内容,我们既不追求削足适履式的短,也不排斥生动活泼、有血有肉的长。倘若文章不是大颂扬式的、干瘪无味的套话连篇,而是深入浅出地评论著作的与众不同之处,并能提供必要的知识和信息,甚至能以商讨的态度提出不同见解,比较具体地指出疏漏瑕疵,议论风生,流光溢采,使读者深信不是敷衍成篇的捧场之作而能欣然卒读,即使多占些篇幅,又何乐而不为? 凡事大概都是知易行难。但愿良好的愿望不被理解为苛求,只盼招来更多的热心人共同求索。
Here are a bunch of letters from the editor, are to improve the quality of the publication of valuable comments, sincere, thought-provoking. This year, we must focus on the economic construction and the center of reform and opening up to improve quality and devise a special column on “economic wide-angle”. The main intention has been set out in the sixth volume last year and the program design. However, judging from the current issue, the review on application-oriented books serving the economic construction remains the low opinion. Although the reasons for the lag is not unrelated to the status of the book, but mainly our book reviews organization work slow. I hope the publishing industry, book review community to provide a lot of information and contributions to help us catch up, catch up. Book Review sector talent, potential is endless. Only from the publication of the six-year practice and the National Book Review Society held a book review backbone training courses have been clues. The delay in forming a book review team, the reason is that our organization lags behind. In the future, apart from continuing to cherish the deep friendship between the established old authors, we will also strive for more experts and scholars to write a book review. Appreciation generous write a small article, is our common aspiration and many readers. Articles promote the essay, one is to hope that more authors within a limited space to get the opportunity to speak, the second is that short essays can often catch the key. In its formal form, B, C and D are all-embracing, but they often overwhelm new ideas, new insights, and main values, making people unable to see the individuality of the critics. Although the essay is hard to speak out freely, it may not be better than the rest, , Quite vivid. It is better to say nothing than to say nothing, this is our original intention. Of course, both long and short, after all, are formal issues. Ultimately, they are subordinate to content. We neither pursue shortcuts, nor lively, flesh-and-blood lengths. If the essay is not celebrated, tedious and cliché, it is a quick and easy way to comment on the distinctions of works and to provide the necessary knowledge and information. It can even offer different opinions in a deliberative manner and point out more specifically Errors and omissions, controversy wind and light, so that readers are convinced that the perfunctory chapter is not enough to join in the study and can readily read, even if more space, why not know everything is easy to know. I hope a good wish is not to be understood as demanding, only hope to attract more enthusiastic people to seek common ground.