The Mystery, Crime, and Thriller Group discussion

I've been meaning to ask. How do you write your book review for this particular genre. Do you have a different criteria when you review the mystery, crime, thriller type of book, as opposed to say a fantasy or a young adult contemporary novel? How do you approach your book review? Please feel free to share your comments here.

You approach any book review the same way. Your way is the best way; i.e. honesty is the best way. First talk about how the book made you feel. Then explain why (what you think are the strength and/or weaknesses of the work in question.) When you mention the genre of the book, you can comment on the way it fits the genre roots, or the way it may overlap other genres (something that is happening these days). Read good reviewers if you want to feel more secure. And revise before posting. Hope that helps.

Short answer: sporadically :)

I'm with Marie-jo; I don't (think I) approach reviews differently for any genre. I write about what inspires / touches / annoys me about the book I've read, the quality of the writing and characters and plot, and sometimes go off on a tangent - usually a good thing, because something about the book taps into some bigger issue or something that's been knocking around my head.

Perhaps there's a feeling with this genre that spoilers a particular issue, but that's something I always try to bear in mind; it can be as much of an issue in SF or 'literary' fiction or romance, but I'm also not a fan of 'whodunnit'-type crime fiction.

A broader knowledge of a genre can be useful (something I don't really have in this area) but the neophyte or casual reader can, hopefully, often bring a fresh perspective.

So, Ken, are you going to answer your own question?

I write the same type of review for all genres. I don't write book reports - did that at school, and I avoid giving away too much plot detail, using the spoiler feature if I cannot avoid it altogether.
I simply detail the standout elements of the book, eg pace plot, narration, characterisation, imagery etc. Usually there is something to critique and I will try to be constructive.

However, I'm not always consistent and regrettably, I have been known to dismiss a book as rubbish. NOW If I identify reviews where I have done this, I will amend them to explain my point of view, or I will delete the review and just leave the star rating.

I don't write book reviews either. If the book really impressed me, I want to write how it made me feel and why I loved it. However, if I disliked the book, I want to give the reason for that also.

Whenever I write a review for a book I've just read, I try to give my comments while comparing it to others in the same genre, series or by the same author. I give reasons for liking or disliking any particular book.

When reviewing a book IS try to be honest about whether I like or Dislike it, but I try to do it in a nice way. I give credit to these authors for trying.

I try to avoid attacking the author and focus on the work by comparing it with others to highlight particular issues. As long as you're not resorting to personal attacks, most people are happy with constructive criticism in my experience.

R.M.F wrote: "I try to avoid attacking the author and focus on the work by comparing it with others to highlight particular issues. As long as you're not resorting to personal attacks, most people are happy with..."

Good point, there is no reason to go on the attack.

R.M.F wrote: "I try to avoid attacking the author and focus on the work by comparing it with others to highlight particular issues. As long as you're not resorting to personal attacks, most people are happy with..."

Good point, there is no reason to go on the attack.

I take the same approach for all genres.

I would include (not necessarily in this order) some information on what the book's about, something putting the book in context (eg the author's other works, trends within the genre) and how I felt about it and why.

And definitely no spoilers!

I once read that a good review should allow someone at a dinner party to talk about the book without having read it. This sounds a bit pretentious but I think the underlying idea is sound.

It's like I haven't read it yet, but where ever I go I see the Book or hear about it. I can tell you, it's certainly got my attention and interest. I can't wait to read it.

No matter what genre, I jot rough notes as I read a book - the good, the bad, the strong, the weak - then refine and polish it before I post it here. I focus on the book, not the author, although his or her writing style often garners a comment. And before I post, I read other reviewers' comments because they sometimes will say what I am thinking (it's nice to know if I'm on the right track or way, way off base) or pick up on something I've missed.

Linda wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I try to avoid attacking the author and focus on the work by comparing it with others to highlight particular issues. As long as you're not resorting to personal attacks, most people ..."

Bear in mind, though, that no matter how friendly your review, there is always someone who will take it personally!

Linda wrote: "It's like I haven't read it yet, but where ever I go I see the Book or hear about it. I can tell you, it's certainly got my attention and interest. I can't w..."

I feel the same way about the book . I have seen so many people in this group talk about this book being good that I had to buy it and see for myself.

Dave wrote: "No matter what genre, I jot rough notes as I read a book - the good, the bad, the strong, the weak - then refine and polish it before I post it here. I focus on the book, not the author, although ..."

I never read reviews from other people before I write mine. I don't want anybody else to sway me one way or the other. Sometimes I'll comment on another person's review afterward. Quite often, I find that I feel much different about a particular book than many others do. If I have purchased a book out of the blue, I don't read any reviews before reading it. I have done that in the past and figured I would dislike a novel, and it turned out that I loved it. Maybe I'm just an oddball . . .

Kathryn: No, you're not an odball.
I, too, often have a different take on a book than the majority. I just like to see how my opinion and theirs line up.
When it comes to reviews by others, every time I've picked up a book that they raved about, I've been disappointed. So now I stick strictly to the back cover blurb. If the book sounds interesting, I'll try it.

Dave wrote: "Kathryn: No, you're not an odball.
I, too, often have a different take on a book than the majority. I just like to see how my opinion and theirs line up.
When it comes to reviews by others, every ..."

I do the same thing. Another thing I look at on a book cover is if another author that I am a fan of read the book and enjoyed it. That has inspired me to read certain books and that usually does work out.

Kathryn wrote: I do the same thing. Another thing I look at on a book cover is if another author that I am a fan of read the book and enjoyed it. That has inspired me to read certain books and that usually does work out.
Not for me. Too often when a writer I like lauds a book, I finish it wondering either Did we read the same book? or What have you been smoking?

R.M.F wrote: "Linda wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I try to avoid attacking the author and focus on the work by comparing it with others to highlight particular issues. As long as you're not resorting to personal attacks..."

If they take it personally I'm sorry, but then they should not ask for reviews.

Dave wrote: "Kathryn wrote: I do the same thing. Another thing I look at on a book cover is if another author that I am a fan of read the book and enjoyed it. That has inspired me to read certain books and that..."

Or, how much did they pay you?

That, too, Kathryn!

Reviewing is an art form, so I find it handy to scour the newspapers to see how reviews are done.

If you mean how do I do a review on Amazon or Goodreads or somewhere like that--a short blurb, in other words--first of all, I try to think of the adjectives I would honestly use to describe the flavor of the book for me--charming, heart-warming, horrifying, suspenseful, etc... Because fiction is so personal, I give any well-written book three stars even if I didn't enjoy it, say that it was well written, and I explain why I personally didn't enjoy it. If my overall impression is "This book is awful in every respect," I don't post a review at all. If the author contacts me to ask why, I give them my honest opinion.

I have to write my reviews very soon after I've finished the book so that I can capture how I felt when I finished it, eg good, bad, indifferent.

I'm like Kathryn too, will only read other people's reviews once read the book and written my own review, except that I invariably find that everyone else's review is much better written haha!

I try to be as honest as possible and if the book is really bad, decline to review it. I try to think of ways my review would help another reader to decide whether to buy or not.

Hi NYKen, Mary Jo, Paul, Chris, and June: I was much impressed by your April 2 discussion, and took the liberty of citing it in an article I wrote for the Authors Helping Authors Resource Site. It was published on the site yesterday (April 11) and it's still up today. If Interested, you can view it at: http://authorshelpingauthors.wordpres...

Does anybody steal other people's reviews and claim the credit, or is that just me? :)

Seriously, I try and compare and contrast to earlier works by the same person.

R.M.F. wrote: Does anybody steal other people's reviews and claim the credit, or is that just me? :)
Seriously, I try and compare and contrast to earlier works by the same person.

I will mention prior reviews I've posted regarding an author's books if they are germane to the current review - such as if this book is markedly better or worse than the previous one. But I've never stolen another person's review. I have, however, included something another reviewer pointed out (in my own words, of course) if it's something I missed writing the rough draft of my review.

What I find difficult is when a self-published author has a good book but it has an unacceptable number of typos. I don't feel like mentioning the typos because so many authors cannot afford a professional editor. But then again I feel I am letting down the review reader.

Bernie: That's been one of my nits to pick about e-books. I see too many typos and word mistakes (wrong word, wrong tense,etc.) in them. The first e-book I read (by a multi-published author) was loaded with them. I always mention them - either that I've found a lot or only a few.
I don't know if the problem is in converting them to e-format or in downloading them to my Kindle.
But I am also seeing more of them in traditional paper books, too.
Could it be none of the publishing houses are using copy or line editors anymore?

Hi Dave,
I doubt if there is any problem with downloads to your Kindle. From the eBook point of view, I think a lot of the trouble is publishers using automated programs to try to covert PDFs into ebooks. It just cannot work as it is like trying to turn a photo into text. From my understanding, you need a real live person at the helm for conversion.
I think you are right about publishers stinting on proper editing. Worldwide, there has been cost cutting in media and publishing over the past few years.
These are symptoms of an industry in rapid change and I think they will be resolved - hopefully sooner rather than later.

Dave wrote: "R.M.F. wrote: Does anybody steal other people's reviews and claim the credit, or is that just me? :)
Seriously, I try and compare and contrast to earlier works by the same person.

I will mention p..."

An honest review always works for me. As long as you're telling the truth (in a polite way) I don't think most people mind.

I write notes while I'm reading because I don't want to forget anything. I like to remember how the book made me feel and if I have any favorite lines, I make sure to jot them down.

I treat every book review the same, doesn't matter the genre of the book. I like to be objective, stating the good and the bad (if anything to reveal). I guess I'm a lax reader where grammar issues don't really bother me. I'm more about feeling something toward the book. This is when I'll write "I loved this" and "I loved that" with specific examples and explain how cool I thought the book was, once again with specifics. If I'm bored throughout the book,then the review would reveal that in some form. I'd just write what the plot was and keep it pretty simple.

I try to be objective and fair with all my book reviews. Honesty is key. However, I don't go out of my way to be extremely rude. I always say "this is just my opinion" if I ever have to say something harsh. That only happened once because the author didn't do any editing at all--it was only a first draft.

Yawatta wrote: "I write notes while I'm reading because I don't want to forget anything. I like to remember how the book made me feel and if I have any favorite lines, I make sure to jot them down.

I treat every ..."

Objectivity is the key. Be polite, be constructive, and you can't go wrong.

I take different approaches depending on the book. There are some people who just want a good, fast ride, and if that's the case, I'll put that information up front so those readers won't waste their time. I follow that up with the detailed review: plot, style, what works, what doesn't. I take great care not to reveal much of the plot. A tell-all review helps no one.

If I don't feel I can give a book a recommendation, I'll concentrate on what could have been better rather than take the opportunity to savage the author. Often, if it's someone I know, I'll send a private message. We are all in this together.

I write about my opinions on the book. Quality of writing, characters, story, that sort of thing. I keep it brief and get to the heart of the matter (good, bad, disappointing). I don't go through the plot because you can read the book synopsis for that.

when I read back over my reviews it would appear I am almost always quite drunk! ha ha!

I tend to write about what I felt about the book, why I felt what I did and what I got out of it.

I don't really give a synopsis of the story because there's already one. I don't feel the need to re-hash it all again. I might pick out one or two scenes or just give a vague overview of the story.

One thing I really don't like are people who are book snobs that will sit there saying things like, "He doesn't know what a plot is" or "The prose is all wrong", blah, blah, blah...things like that. It's not helpful, it's just total bashing for the hell of it. I try to NOT be one of those people.

@N

HAHAHA! I think the same thing! Or else I try to be witty and it comes out sounding dorky!

@carmen I also think there are to many Literature Majors writing these 5000 words reviews too.

Oh, I know! It's like my God people! I just read the REAL book, do I really need to read your rendition of it too?! I just want the facts please, not a tome.

Honestly, 95% of the time I rate, put in my various bookshelves and write a brief paragraph about how I felt about it.

I was not meant to post then .....

Sometimes I'm inspired to write more but I never summarise the book as this can be done by reading the synopsis.

If I DNF ill say why, not rate it ( how can I ), but I'm always going to say that it's just not my cup of tea. I've recently DNF a very popular YA with > 100k ratings and over 4/5 stars - but it just didn't do it for me.

I do read reviews first. It makes me sad to hear people bagging out authors. Just imagine if it was you writing !!? I'm also wary of hyped books.

I write about what I liked and didn't like.
Sometimes that includes mentioning lack of character depth or too much purple prose. For some reason people find it overly critical when it is pointed out as a negative but are perfectly willing to accept it when the prose is praised as beautiful and the characters superbly defined, deep and complex. It is often only considered book snobbery (to steal the term) when the review is slightly critical.

Reading is a completely subjective experience. A brilliant read for one person might be a boring read for another. Who am I or the author for that matter to decide what any readers feels or thinks about a book they have just read or experienced.
No person can ever read or experience a book quite like I or you do. (general you, royal we)
That 'read' is coloured by our own frame of reference.

I think people should also try to respect the fact that the reader and consumer is allowed to own their opinion.

When I write or if I write a review (I don't review everything I read, not by a long shot) I write about the story/book I just read and only about the author as it pertains to the story or other books by that author.

Reading is supposed to be fun and I think reviewing is a way to share that enjoyment.

Don't blow major plot points because you didn't like the book or feel the need to spite the author.

I do my best to remain sober when writing reviews. That helps but I'm then faced with the tricky question of criteria. My personal preference is for a mystery thriller with a gripping storyline that keeps you guessing right up to the very end. I like the book to be well-written. I expect the narrative to flow smoothly. And I expect people to behave and talk like real people. If there are gross errors in the description of places and things I start to lose interest. In the end, it comes down to personal preference ... but it doesn't hurt to analyse what turns you on and what turns you off.

Bit random. I hope it's OK here. But does anyone else wish there were at least 6 stars available for rating? Unless a book really is awful I feel limited by only 3 options. I'd love it if there was a sixth star for - "really blew my socks off" read.
Also, I must confess, if a best selling author with loads of reviews I'll round rating down, but round up the rating for less well know authors. Is that wrong? Should I treat the same way?

I try to keep discussion of the actual plot to a minimum to avoid spoilers. I prefer to discuss technique, and the overall effect of the book, as well as what the author got right and didn't. Sometimes that matters a great deal.

I try to concentrate on the positive aspects of the books I read which is not always easy. I try not to be too critical if I can but I point out if there is a lot of spelling errors because that annoys me to no end.