The RP1 1-Star Club discussion

Who do we rely on for our next book recommendation?

I've created this group in order to test the hypothesis that negatives are more indicative than positives.

Or more specifically, that a person that hates what I hate is less likely to steer me wrong than a person that loves what I love is likely to steer me right. Right?

And hey, even if it doesn't work, at least it can be fun.

This is a brilliant idea. :-)

Well at least it seems to be original, which frankly surprises me... Thanks just the same though :)

One simple explanation - the average rating for books is above 3.

I wonder what the average rating is when the reader got off his lazy ass and wrote a review. I betcha it's lower, though I suspect it's still above 3.

When you give a book a 1-star, there's got to be a deep burning reason for it. (Most) people are not mean just for the sake of being mean.

However, love is less focused... You can give a book a 4 or a 5 just because you're a nice guy and the book didn't offend you, and hey many other people loved it...

I am often MORE motivated to review a book I hated. Maybe I'm malicious, or maybe I'm being charitable trying to save others from the same fate. Bad reviews can be even more passionate than good ones... b/c you wasted so much time.

Did you read "Brave New World"? Going out on a limb here, testing the thread's premise... It was a solid 1-star for me.

You know, I last read that in high school so I really don't remember. I think I thought it was "OK" but that could've just been my less mature, less critical brain talking. Some 1-stars for me: "Freakonomics", Joan Didion's "The Year of Magical Thinking", Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land", Leguin's "The Left Hand of Darkness" (admittedly, I am not a sci-fi person), DeLillo's "End Zone", among others.

I went through a spate of re-readings lately. (I actually didn't read for a long time, the re-readings were a way of coming back...)

My (as you say) less mature, less critical mind seemed to have been attracted to both some godawful stuff and to some actually pretty good books...

Among the 1-stars, I found almost all of the early "standard" sci-fi - Asimov which on second read is just about as stunted as RP1, and Heinlein which on second look (Farnham's comes to mind) is WTF was I thinking....

Stranger in a strange land, specifically, I am pretty sure I read, but nothing much comes to mind. Something about growing his hair at will, and something about shrinking from multiple viewpoints... The rest is a blur. Farnham and Fear no Evil, those I remember more clearly. Old farts getting it on with hot young gals, who might happen to be their daughters or even themselves. Conventional? No. Witty? Nah. Not every defiance is automatically profound.