Kindle book reviews are work; I know, I’ve done a fair number of them. Getting my own work tested, at the point of collection-before-publication, can be a challenge. My writers’ group members often volunteer; for this work they get a signed print copy after I finish the collection. (All my poetry books have been reviewed, after Kindle publication, as well. You can find my author page on Amazon.)

I wish there was a forum, a big list of volunteers to ask one or two from, for getting a decent look-through before I finalize a volume. I have an inventory of ‘finished’ work, which needs that one-more-set-of-eyes check. Others might see typos, inconsistencies, even confusion where I see only clarity. An author can only be so objective about her or his own work. An author can only be so observant about his or her work.

For me, the most useful (and devastating) comment is, ‘I don’t get this.’ It indicates where the author has made a background assumption (location, point of view, situation, whatever) that is not clearly expressed or implied in the work itself. Thus the reader is left thinking, ‘huh? what’s that about?’

I am reminded of Townsend in Up the Organization. To find a flaw in a chain of logic, he imagines a Martian. This Martian knows everything about life on earth except he/she/it is totally ignorant of all involved in the specific topic or logic under discussion. Now imagine explaining your chain of logic to this intelligent alien. Step by tedious step.
When you reach an ‘obvious step’ in your logic that is not actually obvious, the Martian will interrupt with a question. That’s the ‘huh? what’s that about?’ moment.

If you cannot actually close the logic gap at that step, you’ve found at least one problem in your thinking.
If your reviewer sees such a gap, you’ve been shown an opportunity for improvement.

Professionally, I used Townsend’s Martian when we could not debug a computer system problem. It also works when one cannot debug a human process problem. (To quote Bob Ross, when your process is broken, it’s nobody’s fault. Processes are broken at handoffs.) Gaps in a process are like gaps in logic, and our assumptions can prevent us from seeing them.

So in writing, a gap in presentation can come from the author’s assumption that the reader will make the gap-jump he/she always does when writing or editing that piece.

In those Internet places where I have a ‘photo’ it is of a bizarre ambiguous figure looking at a globe. The figure I named Mowgli. The globe is a globe of Mars.
It was on my desk at IBM Canada Limited for years. It is now in my living room. Perhaps I should put it over my computer monitor.

For me, poetry is about truth. Writing does not need to be ‘logical’, but its vessel should bring enough for each reader to experience that truth.

Have I expressed myself? Time to ask Mowgli, the Martian.