Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

I have refrained on Goodreads from writing reviews of books that I gave fewer than 5 stars, especially books in the same genre I write in, and ESPECIALLY books that are very popular. I would never have the audacity to claim to be the next Hunger Games but I feel like, because I wrote a dystopian novel, I'm not allowed to say anything at all negative about The Hunger Games (or City of Ember or etc etc etc) because...well, frankly, who the hell am I? Nobody. I'm nobody. If I was just a READER I'd feel fine to give an opinion, but because I WRITE in that genre I'd be afraid people would think I'm somehow saying my book is better than or otherwise comparing myself to other famous/great dystopian works, and I'm not. Does any of this make sense? Anyway, I was wondering what other people thought about this. :)

I totally understand. I am a big fan of some big name authors...but even my favourite authors have books out there that I didn't really enjoy...or I felt weren't up to their regular standard. But I try my best to keep my views to myself...as they have become successful through their books...and I have only just released my first novel this year.
Anyway...if you are an author you shouldn't have enough time to be writing reviews...:)

In this age of marketing-spin, a willingness to be honest with yourself and your readers is, I think, even more important than ever. I appreciate this quality in my readers and I'm sure the Big Name Authors appreciate it, too. I think you should be honest in your reviews. And let's face it; anyone who can sell a million copies in this tight market is probably pretty good.

I just wish there were ten stars, not 5. Its real hard to compare Nabakov with Rowling, but they are both brilliant writers.

I don't post bad reviews, generally because if a book is that bad I won't finish it. But I will post an ok and above, it doesn't have to be 5 stars.

I don't mind posting a bad review of a book by an established writer if it reflects my honest opinion, although I usually find something likeable and enjoyable in most books I read. But I struggle with books by writers who I know are starting out or trying to establish themselves as writers. If the negatives I find (i.e. amateurish writing, overuse of cliches, one dimensional characterizations) outweigh the positives, I usually opt out of writing a review.

A.K. wrote: "I have refrained on Goodreads from writing reviews of books that I gave fewer than 5 stars, especially books in the same genre I write in, and ESPECIALLY books that are very popular. I would never ..."

First of all, I completely disagree...you are not nobody. You are a reader & a writer with the same rights to your views on ANY book as anyone else. I agree with Denise on that point, and also that I do not mind 3* reviews in the least. I think it shows a good balance of the different readers that have picked up my book, and that's a positive. If you want to write a review to help either other readers or the author, whether it's positively or with constructive criticsm, by all means, go ahead. If you're really not comfortable with it, don't do it. No harm either way. If an author publishes a book and believes it will only be loved by all, they are in the wrong business or need to grow a tougher skin!

I feel the opposite about writing a negative review on a popular book. For some reason, maybe it's knowing my review will be buried in hundreds of others soon and nobody will care, but I'm MUCH less apt to leave a 1 or 2* on a new author who is trying to establish a reading base. Truthfully, I've only ever left 1 bad review of a book in my life, it was a best-seller, and my feelings on it were this. I've read plenty of books I didn't care for, but this one was so offensive to me as a reader AND a writer in that the author/publisher/whoever couldn't be bothered with the most standard writing principles, basic correct English, readable sentence structure, and was (in my opinion) laying a very dangerous groundwork for misleading a very impressionable youth, even if that was not the intended audience. Well blah, blah, blah, the point is, I had seriously strong feelings on that, and was relieved to see I was not alone based on other reviews. If all of us who didn't like the book just sat back and thought "I must be wrong, everyone else loves it," we would all still be thinking we must be nuts and that nobody else feels the same way. Does that make sense? (it's very late & I'm working-2 things that both freeze up my brain.) ;-)

Well this got to be long, but I agree w/the other posters who said your review should just be honest and based on the book you read, not personal feelings about the author or not "I don't normally like this genre, so I'm giving it a 2." I actually read that in a review just the other day. WHY would you chose to read it then? Don't worry about what other's think of your opinions-you're entitled to have them just like the rest of us. Just because you don't like a book in the genre you write in doesn't mean you think yours is better. But it probably is! :-)

Angel wrote: "A.K. wrote: "I have refrained on Goodreads from writing reviews of books that I gave fewer than 5 stars, especially books in the same genre I write in, and ESPECIALLY books that are very popular. I..."

I agree: you have to be honest.
I've never written a bad review, and in general would refrain from writing one EXCEPT if the book struck me as appalling. If I felt strongly enough, then I'd really have to say so. Fortunately, I've never been in that situation.
Occasionally I don't finish a book, but that often is because I'm not particularly enjoying it. That doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad book, though.It may be that it just isn't engaging me.

Denise wrote: "It doesn't matter whether you're a writer who writes in the same genre. You're also a reader and have the same right as anyone else to voice your opinion. I think the controversy rises from vicious reviews and not honest ones."

I agree. I would also suggest that some authors don't give bad reviews for fear of a "reprisal". Sad as it is, this fear is not unfounded. Still, at least on Amazon, there are ways to get a "revenge review" deleted.

I've given one 2* review for a book in my genre. It didn't hurt the author's overall standing very much, though and that's a good thing. Although the review was only 2*, I very carefully explained why, and I accentuated the really good parts of the story and the writer's style.

I'm a generous reviewer in general (though I've just realised I've not reviewed anything much for ages). I'm pretty good at hunting out books I'm already pretty sure I'll enjoy. I did once give a 2 star review to an author I knew. It was deserved, but I still felt terrible.

I review from the stand point of a reader, because when giving a review, that's exactly what I am. The fact that I'm an author shouldn't play into it except for the fact that I know how publishing works. I once gave a 2 star review to a very well known author in a genre I write and got some rather nasty feedback from a couple of her fans saying that since I was an author I shouldn't be slamming another author. First, I didn't slam the other author. I praised her writing style, in fact. What I didn't like, and stated in my review were her characters. This was a romance novel and I ended up not being able to stand the hero. To me, that's a HUGE problem in a novel of that genre.

It all goes back to the difference between being honest, and being vengeful. Honesty isn't a bad thing, and it shouldn't be. We need to stop living in this bubble where all people want to hear is the good and none of the bad. Not everyone is going to like my books, and that's fine. Just be honest about why so other potential readers can make a well informed choice.

I think it all goes back to the perception that our books are our babies--terminology that drives me crazy. I am a wordsmith. You don't like my words? I will write new ones, and maybe you will like those. My books are not my babies. Ever try to change the color of your child's eyes or the shape of their nose? Yet, as an author, I have no problem making changes to improve my writing.

I'm still waiting for that first painful review. I know it's coming and I dread that stab of disappointment when I realize a reader just didn't connect with my work. But, I don't take it personally. Not for my words.

Now, mess with my real babies...and you will see a ferocious mama! :)

I just released my first book and I'm a brand new author. I've been wanting to be a writer for years. I haven't had the time to go through and write reviews for books that I've read over the years yet. I've had both good and bad reviews, and while I puzzle sometimes over the negative reviews, I've found that they make me a better writer.
I have the one star and two star critiques in mind as I write, so as an author I wouldn't be offended if a fellow author gave me a bad review. To me it means there's something I need to work on as a writer and that's okay. I'm learning, but I know not everyone feels the way I do.
I do understand the cliche of leaving a negative review for someone elses work. I think if it's a popular book it's NBD, and in all honesty if it's a book I didn't like I can refrain from writing anything negative about it. I think the situation really depends.

Can't please everyone. There is always someone who didn't enjoy a book, even if was well written, exciting and groundbreaking. Even the classics and best sellers have a share of 1 and 2 stars.

I read a book recently I simply could not get into. It wasn't badly written and usually I like the genre, I simply could not get on with it as I found there was an almost total lack of background or description. Reading the reviews however I seemed to be in a minority, a lot of people really loved it. There were a few who felt along similar similar lines as I did but over all the ratings were good and many.

If a book consistently gets bad reviews that might be something to worry about especially if they say about problems with typos, editing or whatever. However even trad pubbed books have those and there are a few which are poorly written and weak.

I have read great indie books and bad ones and great trad pubbed books and bad ones, but a review is subjective by its very nature.

I tend not to post bad reviews and I certainly don't review every book I read, although I have got more into the habit since I have been on Goodreads. One reason I don't post bad reviews is often I simply don't know what to say. "I did not like this book" doesn't really help anyone. That goes for good reviews as well, sometimes I like books because I do, they brought be joy and entertained me, they made me cry and brought me to my knees but saying WHY this is so in some ways lessens my enjoyment.

Hopefully most people, authors included, are mature enough not to compare one work with another but enjoy (or not) a book on its own merits. No book is perfect to everyone and each brings its own view on the world.

Negative reviews can be useful. It is easy not to see the flaws (or ignore them) and having insider knowledge about what makes a character tick does not mean that will be conveyed to a reader. Sometimes readers simply see a side even the writer didn't. There are also some writers who refuse to take criticism of course, but that is the same in any field.

I think a writer can review another writer's book so long as they review as a reader.

I side with those who review as readers, not authors. The point of a review is to help other readers find good books and avoid stinkers. I've written two-star reviews. I've received a couple of them. Often it just comes down to taste. Your taste, and your opinion, are as valid as anyone's.

I write reviews as a reader, not as a writer. I generally do not write a review if I didn't enjoy the book. As a new writer, I find that I end up reading the books of many other new authors that I would not have read before, either because the fellow new author asked me to, or I ran across it. I can usually find something redeeming about the work, and I will give it a review. If I can find nothing positive to say, I email the author privately and just leave it be.
I certainly appreciate constructive, honest feedback. I don't particularly care for personal attacks on the writer--those type of reviews do not help me gain any insight into what the reader did not like about a book.
I know many authors who do not post reviews (and in fact, I have been advised NOT to review other books). However, I have been a reader all my life, and although I do not review many, I still review. And when another author asks for an honest critique, I try very hard to do so, although lately I find that I have less free time to do that with.
I kinda review like I treat people in real life--if I don't have something decent to say, I just keep my mouth shut. It's too easy on the internet to hit "send" and regret it.

A.K. wrote: "I have refrained on Goodreads from writing reviews of books that I gave fewer than 5 stars, especially books in the same genre I write in, and ESPECIALLY books that are very popular. I would never ..."

I, frankly, believe we owe it to our readers to be honest in our reviews. I was a reviewer before I was an author, frankly. Not all of us are going to like everything we read, and I don't see anything wrong with that.

Your mileage, as always, may vary.

I guess more what I'm talking about is not whether or not to be honest in a rating or review, but rather...here, I'll give an example.

I gave a popular dystopian novel 3 stars in my bookshelf. If I were to write a review, it would be along the lines that the characters were confusing and distant, the plot nearly non existent and predictable, the ending cliche, and the political overtones too overt.

However, I can see someone reacting like, oh, so you can do better? If I was ONLY a reader it would be one thing, but having put myself out there in book form, I feel like I'm opening myself up to criticism along the lines of "Why would you say THOSE characters are two dimensional? You think you can do better? YOUR characters are two dimensional!" Almost a plank-in-the-eye situation. Does that make sense?

So y'all don't think that's the situation? That it's ok to review a book in a constructively negative light without being seen as arrogant?

Just being a writer is opening yourself to criticism.

The real truth is that being a writer at all makes you better equipped than most to review the work, and writing in the same genre even more so.

If someone picks up a popular dystopian novel because the New York Times labeled it a best-seller, they may have never read anything like it before so they are more apt to review it highly because the closest they have to compare it to is a romance novel they once read with a sad ending.

We that can see things for what they really are almost have a duty to point those things out, even if nobody listens.

There is, however, a difference between being criticized because your writing is subpar and being criticized because people think you're an arrogant jerk.

You make a good point, though. Like people's obsession with Fifty Shades...as if they didn't know erotica existed before, or something. ;)

A.K. wrote: "I guess more what I'm talking about is not whether or not to be honest in a rating or review, but rather...here, I'll give an example.

I gave a popular dystopian novel 3 stars in my bookshelf. If..."

First of all, I think it depends on how thick your skin is, so to speak. You are never going to make everyone happy either as an author, or as a reviewer. Second, in the examples you gave, I would suggest you expand on why you thought the characters were two dimensional. Or leave out that phrasing all together and say something like 'I didn't think the characters were developed as well as they could have been.' You're basically saying the same thing, but with less hostile language.

I also agree with Shaun. When you are writing in the genre you should know it better than the average person. I've gotten some of my worst reviews from those who've read 50 Shades and maybe one other book in the erotic genre and now believe they are experts in saying my book is crap. Unfortunately, it's just the reality of being an author. You have to take the good with the bad. I try to be honest, but not mean in my reviews. I never make it personal with the author unless I'm giving a compliment. And if they are a popular author, they've probably gotten worse reviews than yours.

Yeah...I'm clearly not making my point.

I'm not worried about people being critical of my work.

I'm worried that people will say I'm being an arrogant a**hole.

I don't think it's unreasonable at all to not want to be an arrogant a**hole.

I was just asking for opinions on whether or not commenting negatively on another author's review would make people angry that I was being an arrogant a**hole.

I'm not saying I'm afraid of criticism. If I were, publishing a book was the stupidest decision ever.

Authors posting negative reviews of other works is something I've seen lambasted repeatedly in forums, whether either author is famous or not. I'm just trying to figure out where the line is.

A.K. wrote: "Authors posting negative reviews of other works is something I've seen lambasted repeatedly in forums, whether either author is famous or not. I'm just trying to figure out where the line is."

I get what you're saying.

So long as you don't spend the review comparing it to your own... or mentioning your own book at all... I think you should be fine. You sound like someone who is being careful and conscientious about even approaching this topic, so I don't think you have much to worry about.

Nobody likes receiving a negative review... and some handle it with less poise than others. Personally, if someone can't handle the idea that not everyone will absolutely love their book, then that someone isn't ready to be in the world of publishing.

Despite being an author, I am still an avid reader. I write in the same genre as I read, because I like that genre. As a reader, I am still allowed to have an opinion.

I am careful not to just be a jerk in my negative reviews, and I try to do the PCP sandwich-method (praise-criticism-praise) if I have to criticize something. Even if I don't enjoy a book, there's almost always something positive I can say, and if there isn't... I don't leave a public review, most likely because I didn't finish the book (I don't have enough time to finish reading something I'm not enjoying) and if I didn't finish, then I can't in good conscience leave a true "review."

I don't give out negative reviews either.

But I consider scores of 3 and up worthy of reading with the lower rankings noting that the subject matter may not have been engrossing for me but that the book was polished and professional.

I prefer to point out those which gave me pleasure and share that with others. Books that do nothing for me also rarely illicit the need for me to write anything about them.

A.K. wrote: "Yeah...I'm clearly not making my point.

I'm not worried about people being critical of my work.

I'm worried that people will say I'm being an arrogant a**hole.

I don't think it's unreasonable ..."

I understand the point, but I don't think I made my comment very clear.

You are going to be criticized as a writer, based on your writing and based off of who people think you are based on your writing. People are judgmental creatures by nature. I'm sure there are people on this site that already think I'm an arrogant bastard just based on the few posts of mine they've read. Honestly, they don't know me, so I really don't care.

People are going to judge you no matter how little they know about you, that's just how it is. As long as you know the truth and speak honestly of your own opinions, it shouldn't matter to you what others think.

Now, there is a point in caring to be made still. As writers, we rely on other people's opinions to make our living (or at least coffee money). So there is a bit of a line to walk. I still feel though that as long as you're honest and speak the truth of your opinions and why, you shouldn't worry about it.

It's rare that I'll post a negative review of someone else's book... mostly I want to be supportive and constructive, and if I don't have anything good to say, I won't (since I'm an author myself)... if the book's not good, readers will figure it out anyway (or, if I'm not the target audience, they'll find and love it no matter what I think)...

The exception I might make will be for a book that's completely out of my wheelhouse (non-fiction, for example) that brought such a reaction out of me that I had to tell people to avoid it... that's happened to me very rarely (the last time I remember was when I read BLUE LIKE JAZZ, I was so incensed I had to write a review on Amazon)... but for the most part, I don't want to dabble in outright criticism... I'm happy to share with people my opinions of other author's work that I think is great and overlooked, but I prefer to leave really negative criticism for the professional critics...

I find it's far too easy to hate, and a lot harder to be constructive...

Todd wrote: "It's rare that I'll post a negative review of someone else's book... mostly I want to be supportive and constructive, and if I don't have anything good to say, I won't (since I'm an author myself)...."

If a reviewer needs to criticize some aspects of a work, then if this is couched in a constructive way it can be useful to the author, rather than depressing. But really, aren't reviews primarily to help readers choose well?

I don't personally see any difference between readers and authors publishing reviews of works. It is only natural that an author writing in a specific genre is interested in that genre (otherwise he/she would not write in that genre at all...) and could like, love, dislike, hate any representative of the genre. At the same time, also personally, I do not feel comfortable about giving bad reviews (devastating, rather). I can be critical of some aspects of the work I otherwise really liked. In any other case, I will just ignore the work and try to forget the painful reading experience it put me through.

Vardan wrote: "I don't personally see any difference between readers and authors publishing reviews of works. It is only natural that an author writing in a specific genre is interested in that genre (otherwise h..."

I absolutely agree that an author is likely to be keenly interested in others works of that same genre.
I guess a problem can arise when people question the motives behind a review, particularly one that slams the book.
A well-balanced, considered review that quotes specific examples of the good or bad aspects would likely be acceptable to both readers and the author.

A.K. wrote: "Yeah...I'm clearly not making my point.

I'm not worried about people being critical of my work.

I'm worried that people will say I'm being an arrogant a**hole.

I don't think it's unreasonable ..."

And if they do say you're an arrogant asshole, what difference does it make? My question is a serious one. Does it affect your ability to get on with your life because a reader disagrees with your review and tries to make it personal?

No, but it might affect my reputation as an author or sales. I refuse to believe that it's unreasonable to take multiple views and possibilities into consideration when dealing with such a complex issue, especially when self pubbing, since we must be our own marketing team and, therefore, our reputations and the way that we interact with readers makes a huge impact on our success or failure. I'm not nearly as naive as some in this thread seem to think I am, nor am I nearly as sensitive to critique as it seems to be assumed. I am merely trying to ascertain what the general reader consensus would be in regards to this issue, since personal interactions are so vital to the life of an indie/self pubbed author, and since I don't have the benefit of an on call PR manager should I make the wrong decision regarding those interactions.

I really just wanted opinions about how readers would interpret a negative review of a book in the same genre the author writes in. I have received enough varying opinions I've decided it's better to err on the side of caution.

Thanks to all who responded, by the way! I enjoyed learning from the varying opinions. :)

Honesty is the best policy--if you're reviewing a well-known or popular book. If it's an indie book, I'd refrain from giving a bad review. It's better to write nothing than to write a bad review. A bad review can really hurt an indie author. For books that you think are bad, it's better just to email the author and give your case (why something doesn't work) so as to refrain from embarrassing both the author and yourself.

I have a similar "who am I?" feeling when writing a review, especially if I have a criticism on the writing or dialogue. (I generally try to avoid criticisms, but...) When I really stopped and thought about my reviews though, all of them, not just individual ones, I decided that if I only reviewed books I liked then there wouldn't be any need to read the reviews. The thought process could become, she reviewed it therefore she must have liked it. Plus, I think that there is a legitimacy issue here. As a real reader I'm going to like some, love some, dislike some, hate some and be meh about a lot. Though I risk retaliation or, as mentioned above, being seen as arrogant every-time I write a bad review (no matter how kindly I try to do it), I decided that my honesty was more important than anything else.

I disagree that no review is better than a bad review. As an indie author I know how painful bad reviews are. I have a couple doozies out there myself. But if those people hadn't posted and I only ever got to read the reviews of people who liked the book I would make the same mistakes the next time around. I don't want that. My current GR star average is 3.68 and I always said I'd be happy as long as I stayed above 3.5. I'm getting close and will probably cry if it ever dips below, but I still want every honest review I can get...good or bad. (I'll be honest though. It's a lot easier to say and mean that than it was a year ago when the book first came out).

My point is that as long as you are willing and able to accept the same treatment as you dish out (here this would be honesty) then you shouldn't feel bad about it. Though I do always feel guilty that I didn't like someone's baby, I've become comfortable with the belief that a bad review isn't the same thing as a cruel review...and I've written some doozies too. I do try to avoid being the first reviewer, however. I know how hard those first reviews are to come by, but in case I don't like the book I try not to risk reading and reviewing a book that doesn't have anything to balance out a poor review. I guess that is my attempt at a compromise.

I'm not an author, just a reader but here is my opinion.
I think that authors are also readers and they have a right to not like a book and give a review saying they didn't and why. Even if it is in a genre that you write in, there will be books that you just don't like and authors who need some help to get it right. You can tell the difference between a review that is thoughtfully written to help an new author and one that is just bashing that author.
I think it is wrong for anyone to give a review that is rude or just there to bash a book. Whether you are an author or just a reader, as long as you give a truthful, tasteful review of a book then good or bad it is ok to do.

Jeridel wrote: "Honesty is the best policy--if you're reviewing a well-known or popular book. If it's an indie book, I'd refrain from giving a bad review. It's better to write nothing than to write a bad review. A..."

Well said. I am a reader as well as a writer, and sometimes I love a book so much I want to let others know about it. If it is a book that is already a mega-bestseller, then my review certainly will not make much of an impact. However, if the book has few or no reviews, I wouldn't leave a negative review, I would just leave it alone. Perhaps it just wasn't my cup of tea, and maybe there is a niche for that particular book that I am missing.

As for the OPs question, I see what you are getting at. I recently read a book in my genre that had been on the NYT bestseller list and everyone is raving about. I HATED the book. The writing was disjointed, I had a hard time even LIKING the characters, and I felt that the flow was so bad I just could not follow the story. I truly did not understand all the glowing reviews.
I started to review it, wanted to leave a 2 star, and then just left it alone. I see what you are saying about backlash, and I thought, "well, if so many people thought this was GREAT, maybe I should check my own writing out closer before I criticize?"
So I did check out my own work, which is a completely different writing style, and I still felt the same way about that book.
I get it. It's tough to put yourself out there. It's hard enough to be an author & having your books out there, up for criticism or hopefully praise. Unfortunately, if as authors we review other books, we may experience backlash. I suppose we must decide if writing a review is worth it.
Who am I to say another book is good or not? Well, I'm a reader, and I know what I like to read. Just because I write doesn't mean I stopped reading. I figure, haters are gonna hate. I'm just gonna do my thing most days ;)

I just gave an indie book a 1 star review. It was apparent to me the author did little to no research prior, the characters were atrocious, and the writing amateur. I write reviews with my opinion to save readers their money.

I get that some authors are wary of backlash, I am as well, but we should also be protective of our craft. We are writers, yes we can be critical, and yes we deserve an opinion.

Who am I doing a service to if I only write good reviews? If someone is going to give me a negative review because I left one of their book, let them. Just how I view it and I know my opinion may not be in accordance with others' opinions but it is mine.

:-)

Sadie wrote: "I have a similar "who am I?" feeling when writing a review, especially if I have a criticism on the writing or dialogue. (I generally try to avoid criticisms, but...) When I really stopped and thou..."

I agree. As they say, better a honest slap than a false kiss. I woke one morning to see I had gotten a one star review on Amazon for my novel, Raised by Hand, Lifted by the Tides, and thought I'd lose my mind, until I read it. I think reviews/reviewers are probably the biggest and most helpful part of the writing process, other than writing, getting it done (of course). I've had reviews where I contacted the person and asked why only three stars? And when they generously answered, I was put at ease. This gave me this particular reader's perspective that I wouldn't have had access to otherwise if they hadn't taken the time to read and review my work. Low rating reviews are not necessarily an indicator of your writing skill/talent. I think of them as valuable information the writer can choose to use or not use.

Missy wrote: "I just gave an indie book a 1 star review. It was apparent to me the author did little to no research prior, the characters were atrocious, and the writing amateur. I write reviews with my opinion ..."

I do see what you are saying.
PS~ Thank you for serving our country. I enjoyed your bio, and I think your reviews are well written and honest. And I like your hat. ;)

this is an interesting topic because my experience in the past has shaped what I do now. In other words, if you'd asked me a couple years ago, I'd answer different.

REVIEW COPIES: I struggle with giving negative reviews. There have been a couple of times I preferred not to give a review at all, but the author had already gifted me a review copy, so I felt a certain amount of obligation.
And I've handled it in different ways. I've tried to find what was good about the book and mention that, while deducting a star.
A recent book, I really struggled, because I thought the writer had talent but had sandbagged themselves midway through the book by a change in tone, POV and momentum. I hated myself, but I wrote a long justification for what I thought was wrong. I expected a bad reaction, but in fact both the editor and writer thanked me publicly and via email for finding what I considered a flaw in the narrative.

That would be the unusual reaction. They were class all the way.

OTHER REVIEWS:

Before I was a writer I did review several books. I was extremely honest. I even gave a well-known author I admire a very low rating, and was worried until I saw I wasn't the only one: the majority of ratings for that book were very low, for similar reasons.

But then, I made the mistake of rating the first self-published book I'd ever read a very low rating on amazon, which I felt his book deserved for a variety of reasons, chiefly writing, but also because many passages felt sharply misogynist to me, and I said so in the review, even quoting those passages. Well, the you know what hit the fan, and the author organized his friends to get on amazon and attack my review in the comments, and to downvote EVERY other review I'd ever made, even one for a cat scratching post (?). It was a full on assault, and the reason I knew of how organized it was is because I then followed the author on twitter, so I could see the plotting against me clearly, and in the open on his blog website.
Finally, I felt this really wasn't worth it. The book got high reviews from other people, so maybe it was just me, or people who didn't like it were hounded as I was and coerced to delete their review. But the book itself was not worth the anxiety I was getting about it, so I went to his website and said "you win" and removed my review. It was probably cowardly on my part, but I didn't want to deal with it.

Since then, I try to review things I like, or at least can find some good in, and don't give very low ratings anymore.

Interestingly enough, I've read enough self-published books since that incident that were WAYYYYY worse than his, so in retrospect I probably WAS being harsher on him than he deserved, comparatively speaking.

sooooo......

Now I'm an author and I DO feel some pressure to be kinder in my reviews of other books, but luckily for the most part the ones I review are pretty good so its not worked out to be a problem.

whew! that was long enough!

Sadie wrote: "I have a similar "who am I?" feeling when writing a review, especially if I have a criticism on the writing or dialogue. (I generally try to avoid criticisms, but...) When I really stopped and thou..."

@message 39, Well said, Sadie.

Others on here have expressed concern about giving low star reviews because of the risk of backlash. First of all, aren't there rules in place to curb stalkers and predators like that? If Amazon is going to remove your review because you write in that genre, don't they also respond to real problems like troll and stalker reviews? Secondly, if we let people people bully us into hiding our say, then everyone else will hear a very lopsided side of things.

I disagree with the whole idea of not leaving bad reviews. You can say it's kind all you want, but if someone's work is genuinely bad, then you're actually doing a disservice to the author and the other people who may waste money on it.

If you don't like a work because "It just wasn't your cup of tea." Then fine, mention that, but that doesn't mean you can't rate the work on it's technical merit.

If a work is especially bad though, with spelling and word choice mistakes, bad grammar, poor characterization and nonsensical story-lines, then you're helping the author by pointing them out, whether they appreciate it or not. If they don't appreciate it, that's their refusal to grow as a writer, not a reflection on you. Otherwise, you're also helping the public, by warning them about a book that despite (hopefully) the best intentions of the writer, is just plain bad. How upset would you be if you bought something, found out it was horrible, and then discovered one of your friends knew it was bad and didn't say anything to you about it because "They didn't want to hurt the author's feelings."? That was money wasted, time wasted, and all because someone else was worried about the author's self-esteem.

Worrying about backlash over a bad review is just an excuse. Could it happen? Sure. Will it happen? Possibly. But people are going to judge you on everything you do. There will probably be some people out there who dislike you and your work and slam you for no other reason than because you're there, more than likely, they'll never have even picked up any of your work and actually glanced through it.

I don't think trying to be considerate about the complex interpersonal relationships at play between a self published author, who exists almost entirely online, and their readers, whose impression of them can make or break a career, is an "excuse." Also, it is not an "excuse" to, if you feel negatively about another's work that was very popular, use that to critique your own work (the "plank in the eye" metaphor or the "this author has 10,000 five star reviews and I have 2, perhaps I should use this opinion to critically evaluate my own work" effect.) These aren't excuses. These are recognitions that we exist in a delicate balance of interplay with people who won't know much more about us than the Internet presence we present.

I thought this was about an author reviewing another author's work. When did this become about the reviewer and their readers?

It is an excuse. It's almost like saying "I'll be nice to you if you'll be nice to me." All these "complex interpersonal relationships" you talk about? Garbage. People are going to form their opinions of you independent of your intentions and sometimes independent of what you put out there. People will misread your comments, interject meanings you never intended, and there is nothing you can do about it. People aren't going to see a random book on Amazon, see the author's name and then scour the internet to find out everything they can about them before they decide to buy the book. They'll get the book if it strikes their fancy, and then, if they liked the book, they MIGHT look the author up to see if they've written more. They're not going to dive straight to a facebook page or a blog to cozy up with the author.

These readers are customers. Not family and not friends. (Friends and family can BE readers and customers, but it doesn't work the other way around.)

Also. I don't believe in comparing correlations like your second example shows. Unless both books are in the same genre, released at the same time, by authors with similar histories (ie, they both only have released the one book), and did exactly the same thing as far as advertising and promotion. Then you have nothing to compare. This author has 10,000 five star reviews and I have 2. Could it be that their book has been out for ten years while yours has been one? Could it be they paid thousands of dollars for a promotion campaign? Could it be they have ten, twenty or more books published compared to your one, two, or three?

A.K. wrote: "I have refrained on Goodreads from writing reviews of books that I gave fewer than 5 stars..."

I can understand your reluctance to give one-star reviews, and sort of get your reluctance to give two stars (the GR version of "meh"). However, to me five stars means the book is an out-of-the-park home run. About ten percent of my reviews are five stars, including Hamlet and The Maltese Falcon.

If all of your reviews are five stars, then people who look at your track record will come to discount or ignore your reviews. We all know that not every book we read is going to be a timeless classic, and we get suspicious of people who seem to hit the jackpot with every book.

There's nothing wrong with a four-star review (I'm perfectly happy with the ones my book has received so far), and three stars on GR still means "I liked it". Giving a book a padded rating isn't supportive; it sets up the reader for possible disappointment and an equally possible poor review that will counteract yours.

I'd far rather a reader come to my book expecting a four-star read and be pleasantly surprised, than come expecting revelation, not get it in a way she wants, and write a two-star review out of pique. Of course, if you think my book really is a five-star read, feel free to say so, but don't do it just because you're afraid to hurt my feelings. I'm a big boy.

As I stated before, I have seen so many Internet forums blow up, so many readers put off, by some negative action taken by an author on another author. And you say we shouldn't pay attention to that? That we shouldn't be cautious about how our actions will be perceived? I think that's an excuse to not have to consider the potential ramifications of your actions.

All I wanted was a reader's opinion, similar to those in the "Should authors post reviews of their own books" and "Should authors respond to reviews" thread. If this discussion is going to turn into a attack on me - which I genuinely don't understand, I was asking an honest question that I still think deserves consideration - then the entire thread has lost its purpose.

If you feel the comments are turning into personal attacks, then you're missing the whole point in making a thread to have a discussion, and you're proving my point that people will read into whatever you say how they will regardless of what you meant. You started this thread by stating your opinions on a specific subject. I have tried to simply point out that your opinions are flawed and why.

I will grant, some of my comments are a bit angrier than I intended, but I am getting very tired of hearing about indie and self-published authors crying and whining things like "Don't give me bad reviews" and "I don't have a Big 6 publisher, cut me some slack." So in that vein, I will apologize.

However, most of my points still stand. In order to clean things up a little, I will refer to your original statement.

"I have refrained on Goodreads from writing reviews of books that I gave fewer than 5 stars."

First off, the idea of only rating things 5 stars is just a bad one. It's like the little kid running through the store, grabbing random things and declaring each one "The best toy EVER!". After three or four, you're just rolling your eyes and nodding and their opinion on what makes a toy good has become completely irrelevant. As well, by only giving out the best rating possible, you make the whole system irrelevant. There is a reason we mark things out to be bad as well as good. Imagine if our ancestor's didn't point out plants that were poisonous to their friends and children because they only wanted to point out the good things. We improve in general because we point out the good and the bad things around us.

" I would never have the audacity to claim to be the next Hunger Games but I feel like, because I wrote a dystopian novel, I'm not allowed to say anything at all negative about The Hunger Games (or City of Ember or etc etc etc) because...well, frankly, who the hell am I? Nobody. I'm nobody"

Exactly. You're nobody. Especially on a popular book with thousands of reviews. I'd guess around 90% of the other people reading and reviewing that work view you as nothing more than one of them. They don't know you're a writer, and they don't actually care that you're a writer. Also, the fact that you are a writer of the same genre gives you more insight into what makes a story of that genre good and makes your review strictly better than John Smith's one-line, five-star review which reads "Dis book is teh ROXXX!!" If the people most qualified to review a work are afraid to do so, then we really have no reviews worth reading.

"If I was just a READER I'd feel fine to give an opinion, but because I WRITE in that genre I'd be afraid people would think I'm somehow saying my book is better than or otherwise comparing myself to other famous/great dystopian works, and I'm not. Does any of this make sense? Anyway, I was wondering what other people thought about this. :)"

Have you ever talked to someone that read a writer's review of a book and felt this way? The only way I would get this sense is if the review the author left was full of comparisons to their own book and was slamming the other work needlessly and without giving real reasons for putting the work down. If your review picks out technical details and occasionally points out things that worked and that you liked. There should be nothing to worry about.

As for me, personally. I feel it would always be better to walk into a room with your head held high than to slink in like every step is on eggshells and a single crack would spell your doom. That, of course though, is simply my opinion.

A.K, I understand how you feel. I myself got into some hot water a month or so back when I made a comment about a review someone gave on my book, it turned ugly and people were throwing me under the bus and everything. I could have defended myself but I didn't see the point cause it would have gone back and forth, kind of a he said/they said type of deal.

People may have the right to their opinions but sometimes some go a bit too far and unless they truly know the situation or aren't going to be civil then it's probably best that they keep to themselves. Your right though A.K, this topic is one of those that blow up everywhere you turn and most of the time it gets quite ugly as again I've been caught up in a few. It's unfortunate that some people are the way they are. Should any author review their own book? ehh I say they can rate the book with stars but their review should come off more as a promotional aspect. I think an author should comment on a review if the review is in bad taste, doesn't relate to the book or is an attack on the author but in most cases it's probably best to refrain from commenting to avoid being outcast.

I'll say this, when someone rips on my work I wanna defend myself or try to persuade them that maybe they should look again but everyone has the right to their opinion and you truly can't please everyone. This topic I absolutely agree is one that will catch fire and sometimes words that are water may not be enough to put it out with some people.

Unless you're writing strictly as a hobby then don't ask friends and family to review/critique. Keep it business. When I request reviews, I don't know the reviewer. I try to stick with reviewers who have a record of being open to reviewing books in my genre. If we do become "friends" this happens after all is said and done, and they've posted their review. I mean, who wants a "courtesy" review? I think this is about whether writing is something you're doing as a profession or as a hobby. People are entitled to their opinion. It doesn't mean it's valid.