Review for the reviewer's review Pathology of book review: «L Histoire de la Littérature française du XIXe siècle», SAMT publication, Institute of Humanities

Regarding the book review of «L’Histoire de la Littérature française du XIXe siècle», written by Mrs Mitra Rayissi (PhD), from SAMT publication which appears to more a bad derivative review than a book review, the authors of the book have decided to write this article intending to shed light on the improper critiques in academia with the purpose that eventually such critiques will be replaced with more scientifically written articles.
In this paper, with precise focus on reasoning, the review of the critic is analyzed to depict how, considering the book’s limited number of readers and its medium, the comparison between this book and internationally acclaimed resource books which are published by international publishers cannot be a just comparison. Furthermore, why the significant role of the publisher regarding the review process and editing has been disregarded and rather authors are denounced for this issue? The current paper, undoubtedly, has not been written to defend the inefficiency of academic books in our country; the sole objective is to tackle the phenomenon of bad derivative review which is detrimental to the current situation of academia in the country.