Today's Life

Should one annotate scholarly book reviews, specifically articles?

Today’s Life edited the following
Q&A: Should one annotate scholarly book reviews, specifically articles?

I can see how annotations for book reviews may help other readers get an opinion on the book reviews, but is it normal practice among scholars to review/evaluate someone else’s review? What substantial or practical benefits would there be for this?
Lenlen,
It would be quite a cerebral calisthenics to battle on reviews. lol. But have you actually read an annotation on a book review? Is this normal practice? I would be very interested in reading one.

The answer in the following:

Answer by Lenlen
I don’t see anything wrong with annotating any review material. It maybe an intellectual exercise which gives satisfaction to the annotator, but more than that, it might widen more the horizon of the original reviewer; gives more room for scholarly expression and/or inquiry. A “review” of another “review” might shed light on items unclear or misunderstood. The danger though, is reviewers may engage in endless evaluation and reevaluation, especially, if the first reviewer doesn’t or can’t accept the “review” on his “review?” That would give the readers an array of intellectual menus to feast on. Well, that’s merry, a lot of cerebral calesthenics, and is that not a benefit? How about aking the writer ot the material in review?Thanks, I can only read reviews and cannot write one.

What do you think? Answer below!