Wish to review a book or film?

If you want to review a book that has been published within the last three years, you can contact our book review editor Christien Klaufus to check whether the book fits the scope of ERLACS. ERLACS will contact the publisher to provide a digital version for review only. When submitted, a book review undergoes a quick review process and when accepted, it will be published online very soon. 

Please include your experience, university or institution, work or private address, and email address. You may also recommend a book that pertains to the social sciences and history of Latin America in a broad sense to be reviewed.  

Book reviews can be submitted in either English or Spanish and should have a length of 800 to 1000 words. Please include the following elements in your review: a very brief description of the book's nature and structure, a summary of the book's main arguments, and your opinion about the book's main contributions and flaws. The review should be submitted by e-mail. All book reviews are screened for their suitability.

ERLACS is publishing content soon after it is ready in two ongoing issues: January-June and July-December. For book reviews, this means that each one will be published individually in the online Book Review section soon after the author has checked the proofs. Each review will have its own DOI (digital object identifier) number. For authors of book reviews, this also means that there is no specific deadline, and at the same time, the review will be made available to a broad public much sooner.

ERLACS also publishes review essays. These essays handle three to six recently published books within the context of one theme, and are from 2000 to 5000 words in length, depending on the number of books included. All review essays are screened for their suitability. If you want to write a review essay, please get in touch with the Book Review Editor: reviews@cedla.nl.  

Guidelines for Book Reviewers

Book reviews should be approximately 800-1000 words and not exceed 1200. Reviews should provide a clear and concise description of the book and its thesis, situate the book within the relevant literature, and present its contribution to the field of Latin American Studies. It should speak to the broad and interdisciplinary readership of ERLACS, avoiding discipline-specific jargon. The review should also consider how the book meets its objectives and draws on relevant source material. Please, include:

1. Bibliographic details: (Élites, radicalismo y democracia: Un estudio comparado sobre América Latina, by Asbel Bohigues, Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas, 2021; Indianidad evanescente en los Andes de Ecuador, by Víctor Bretón Solo de Zaldívar, FLACSO Ecuador / Edicions Universitat de Lleida, 2022)

2. A brief description of the contents of the book.

3. An assessment of the author's authority/biases.

4. An evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the book taking into account the author's objective/s in writing the book, and drawing on relevant evidence to support the reviewer's judgments.

5. An overall assessment of the book and its contribution to recent academic debates (or studies) on the topic.

Reviews should be 1,5-spaced, in 12-point font.

Upon reception of the review, the book review editors will edit it for clarity, length, and grammar. Minor edits will be returned to the author for your approval. When major revisions are necessary, the editors will return the review with a list of requested changes. Once the editing process is complete, the editorial office will contact you with page proofs.

Wish to write a film review?

If you are interested in writing a review of a feature-length documentary (minimum 40 minutes) from and/or about Latin America and the Caribbean, released in the past two years, please submit a brief proposal to our film review editors, Emiel Martens (e.s.martens@uva.nl) and Débora Póvoa (povoa@eshcc.eur.nl). Your proposal should include the documentary’s title, its director(s) and producer(s), your motivation for reviewing the film, and a short bio (including your experience, affiliation, and contact information).

Film reviews must be written in English and should be 800 to 1,000 words long. Upon approval of your proposal, you will receive specific guidelines for structuring and formatting your review. Once the review is completed, you’ll have to submit the (Word) document via email to both editors. Then, there will be a few rounds of feedback with (one of) our editors, and the review will be published once the editing process has been completed.

There are no fixed deadlines. Once your review is completed and the proofs are approved, ERLACS will publish the content online. The review will also appear in one of ERLACS’ two ongoing issues: January-June or July-December, and each review will receive its own DOI (digital object identifier).

Guidelines for Film reviewers

- Film reviews should submitted in English and have a length between 800-1,000 words.
- Use Times New Roman 12 as font and use endnotes when referencing or expanding on the main text. ERLACS adheres to the APA citation style.
- A film review should contain the following elements (usually in this order):
1. Film details: Put the film’s details on top of your review: Original film title (English film title), directed by [name director]. Country of production, Year of release, e.g. A las puertas del infierno: niños rotos (At the gates of hell: broken children), directed by Miguel Toral. Spain, 2017. Also, provide a first footnote here, containing information about where the film can be seen (e.g. at film festivals or on YouTube);
2. Field of study / topic in focus: Start your review with an introduction to the field(s) and/or topic(s) addressed in the documentary (1-2 paragraphs);
3. Production story: provide some background on the development, production and distri-bution/circulation of the documentary (1 paragraph);
4. Objectives / arguments / methods: Identify what the documentary aims to ‘say’ (in terms of objectives, arguments and theories) and what the documentary ‘does’ (in terms of the content and style that is used to ‘say’ something) (1-2 paragraphs);
5. Structure: Explain how the documentary’s storyline is structured and, if possibly, what the sub-arguments are that are gradually presented (in short: how is the documentary built up?)(1-2 paragraphs);
6. Evaluation: Discuss the ‘pros’ (strengths) and ‘cons’ (weaknesses) of the documentary (1-2 paragraphs);
7. Closure: Present your ‘final verdict’ of the documentary (0,5-1 paragraph);
8. Contact details: Close your film review with your contact details: Your name and surname, your university affiliation, the city of the university and your email address.