厄普代克關於如何寫書評的六條「金科玉律」是什麼？

這六點來是他的書：『Picked Up Pieces』

1. Try to understand what the author wished to do, and do not blame him for not achieving what he did not attempt.

2. Give him enough direct quotation—at least one extended passage—of the book』s prose so the review』s reader can form his own impression, can get his own taste.

3. Confirm your description of the book with quotation from the book, if only phrase-long, rather than proceeding by fuzzy precis.

4. Go easy on plot summary, and do not give away the ending. (How astounded and indignant was I, when innocent, to find reviewers blabbing, and with the sublime inaccuracy of drunken lords reporting on a peasants』 revolt, all the turns of my suspenseful and surpriseful narrative! Most ironically, the only readers who approach a book as the author intends, unpolluted by pre-knowledge of the plot, are the detested reviewers themselves. And then, years later, the blessed fool who picks the volume at random from a library shelf.)

5. If the book is judged deficient, cite a successful example along the same lines, from the author』s ouevre or elsewhere. Try to understand the failure. Sure it』s his and not yours?

To these concrete five might be added a vaguer sixth, having to do with maintaining a chemical purity in the reaction between product and appraiser. Do not accept for review a book you are predisposed to dislike, or committed by friendship to like. Do not imagine yourself a caretaker of any tradition, an enforcer of any party standards, a warrior in an idealogical battle, a corrections officer of any kind. Never, never (John Aldridge, Norman Podhoretz) try to put the author 「in his place,」 making him a pawn in a contest with other reviewers. Review the book, not the reputation. Submit to whatever spell, weak or strong, is being cast. Better to praise and share than blame and ban. The communion between reviewer and his public is based upon the presumption of certain possible joys in reading, and all our discriminations should curve toward that end.

大致意思是：

1. 盡量去理解作者想寫出什麼，同時也不要責備他沒能寫出他根本就不想去寫的。

2. 給出足夠的原文引用 —— 至少較長的一段，這樣讀者看到此文就會產生他自己的印象，獲得他自己口味。

3. 評論夠短的話，請直接引用原文，不要給一些模糊不清的結論。

4. 主要部分的評論，慢慢來，不要言辭激烈而愚蠢，別丟掉了結尾部分。

5. 對差評，看看那部分中寫得好的地方，試圖去理解為什麼沒寫好。搞清楚那是他的失敗，還是你自己的評論不對。

6. 絕對客觀和中立。

第四五條翻譯的不太準確。

第四條是說：別太執著劇情梗概，也別洩露書的結局。