Bisky's Twitterling's Scribbles! discussion

This question is bugging me. I have met some writers on net claiming they are great, so full of themselves and when I have searched them here at Goodreads, their average rating for all books is like 3.5. I am aware of the fact that every reader is different, but I am not sure I would actually pay for that book. Where you stand about this one?

I usually don't read ratings, personally. If a book intrigues me, I'll read it and decided for myself.

There is a book called "The Age of Ra" by James Lovegrove I have bought few years ago cause of it's description at the back cover. Actually, i have bought 3 books of the same Author. I started reading it in September last year, red around 70 pages and almost thrown it to trash. I gave it here 2 stars only cause of idea. Everything else was completely fail for me, yet I have liked the description and it interested me very much. :/

I agree Nicole. I have read books based on how great everyone claim they were and didn't enjoy it, while I have also read books I thought were great but others didn't. So I guess it's trial and error until you find an author who writes what you like.

I don't mind spending money on "bad" books, because reading them, to me, at the very least helps my writing in the way of 'what not to do' haha I just read something that's not so good, and then think, 'Obviously X-Y-Z didn't work about this book, so…never do that' haha.

As William Faulkner said, “Read, read, read. Read everything -- trash, classics, good and bad, and see how they do it. Just like a carpenter who works as an apprentice and studies the master. Read! You'll absorb it.
Then write. If it's good, you'll find out. If it's not, throw it out of the window.”

I agree Nicole, but it's so much more fun reading GOOD books!

G.G. wrote: "I agree Nicole, but it's so much more fun reading GOOD books!"

Oh most definitely!

Having just received a revenge review of 1 star for leaving a review of 3 stars on behalf of Awesome Indies, I doubt whether reviews are even trustworthy anymore. Such a sad world we live in. The same author also engaged in abusive emails to the AI administrator. The 2nd reviewer (who also gave 3 stars) was anonymous under AI's umbrella so they were protected. Amazon have not posted the 1 star, but it is here on GR, I have flagged it, and we shall wait and see.
Even before this happened, I always tried to read a sample first, this is the best indicator of the quality of the writing. After that I look at reviews-but most important, is the blurb and cover. :D

I don't feel I can trust reviews at all, which is a shame. There's too much that seems to be going on in the murky background with some authors - paid reviews, positive review swaps, and so on. Of course, reputable and decent people don't stoop to such things, but you can't tell who is reputable and decent from reading the reviews!

I look at the blurb more than anything, and if that grabs me I look at the sample. I'm not that bothered by the cover, to be honest, as long as it isn't too awful - it's not the cover I want to read (and I've read some rubbish with great covers, and some great stuff with covers that were just OK-ish). A great cover does not a great writer make! Also, if you were to ask me what the covers of my favourite books were like, I wouldn't have a clue - it's not something that I tend to remember anyway.

Having said that, although I pretty much ignore the ratings generally, I do usually read through the reviews just to see if there is any running theme of 'badly written' or 'poor grasp of grammar' or anything - that kind of thing might put me off. Other than that, though, when it comes to films and music and so on, I know that often disagree with the reviews and ratings given by other people anyway, so I prefer to judge for myself.

Also, I don't mind a bit of risk - sometimes there is nothing more entertaining and amusing than a truly, utterly awful book (or film, or band)!

I most often choose a book by its cover art and the teaser on the back cover. Ratings have never influenced my interest one way or another.

I'm never sure with reviews either. The horror stories with review swaps is one of the reasons I don't allow it here. Also if a review mentions spelling and grammar, sometimes I think people can be too harsh, I expect one or two typos in even the best indies, as I've said before, they just don't have the resources of mainstream books.

Cover art is very important to me with Indie books. It doesn't have to be flashy, but if it looks like crap with lime green comic sans etc, I'll assume the same effort has been put into the writing.

Bisky wrote: "I'm never sure with reviews either. The horror stories with review swaps is one of the reasons I don't allow it here. Also if a review mentions spelling and grammar, sometimes I think people can be..."

Bisky wrote: "I'm never sure with reviews either. The horror stories with review swaps is one of the reasons I don't allow it here. Also if a review mentions spelling and grammar, sometimes I think people can be..."

Bisky wrote: "I'm never sure with reviews either. The horror stories with review swaps is one of the reasons I don't allow it here. Also if a review mentions spelling and grammar, sometimes I think people can be..."
I agree

@Harmony I read your review and I don't see why an author should be mad about it. I've seen reviews with 4 stars that clearly said they didn't like the book and had more things against it than you did. (Enough that I even wondered why 4 stars) Sure the stars count, but in the end it's what people say or how they say it that should count more. I've written a 3 star review not too long ago. Someone replied to it that what I wrote made them want to check it out.
People have different reasons to put 3-4 or 5 stars but anyone of them means they liked it so why the hate?

GG is right. As writers, those medium and poor reviews should be looked at as opportunity to spot needed areas of improvement. Feedback in any form is golden, so long as it is genuine.

I would be happy even to see 1 star review if it's an honest one and points out real flaws, not posted just because. Ppl are mean these days :/

@C.S. great point for Amazon! :D I totally forgot about that one

I agree with Nicole and C.S.

I have found that when it comes to fiction or movies, ratings and reviews are highly suspect. Very few people actually review; they react based on whatever baggage or prejudices they bring to the table. 5 star reviews may be from die-hard fans or even friends of the author and many, perhaps even most, one and two star reviews are from trolls or haters or even that above-mentioned "revenge review".

However, when it comes to non-fiction it is a completely different game. The reviews are written by people who share my passion or interest on whatever the subject is and usually WANT the book to be good. So if I am buying say a biography of a director I love, the reviews are almost always very helpful.

I can almost tell instantly based on the premise, packaging, and back cover blurb whether of not I will like a book. Then I use the Amazon or Google look inside feature and within a few sentences I know for sure.

I will pick books the same way I used to pick them before there was Amazon or reviews or Goodreads. If I find the book interesting I'm willing to buy it. If it doesn't live up to expectation I won't read anything else by that author or I'll take the next book out from the library. If there is a disproportionate amount of bad reviews obviously that will affect my buying decision. I read the blurb and the first few pages. The rest is my decision to invest in the book and give it a chance or take a leap of faith. But as I've learned from experience, especially on Goodreads, anyone can leave a rating on your book even if they hadn't read your book. I guess one thing that upsets me about the whole Indie market is that readers are willing to put a price tag on what the book is "worth" whereas no one questions big publishing. I know, I get it, no need to explain but it really bugs me.

Also, websites like Goodreads make it really easy to click on the star rating by accident. It's happened a few times to me I can't imagine it doesn't happen to anyone else.

Yes, it happens sadly, and it took me a while to discover that I could just delete these books from my library and the rating would disappear. On Amazon, you can't do it by mistake since you need a title AND a review for them to even consider it.

I review for a website and my reviews are simply MY thoughts and no one else's.Not everyone is going to agree with what I write and some people might even hate what I write. I can't help that because I try to be as honest as possible. I recently wrote a review that the author was not happy with and she wrote the owner of the site.The owner backed me up to the hilt.I even said I was sorry and that I hated to write what I did in the review itself. I had received the book from the publisher so I HAD to review it.It was just horrendous. I will not be re-posting that review on Amazon or GoodReads as would be my usual. I guess my point is that there are lots of reviewers out there that are trying to be honest. But I repeat-it is my opinion only so take what I or any other reviewer writes as only one opinion. And by the way, I write way more good reviews then bad. We no longer give out stars so that the review is more about what we liked or didn't like and not about telling an author they have just written a one star or a two star book. It seems to be working.

Lorna - I agree with the no stars. It's pretty subjective. I've gotten people who said they really loved my book and gave it three stars. I was a bit confused. I'm pretty happy with three star reviews as long as the review breaks down what the reader liked and disliked. I am not offended as long it is a constructive criticism and not a blanket statement of oh I didn't like it. As far as rating books - I'm not a professional reviewer so as long as I enjoyed the three - six hours spent reading a book I will give it 4-5 even if there are inconsistencies or plot holes - I rate based on my level of enjoyment. I also find sometimes I am not in the right frame of mind for a certain type of book so I'll shelve it until later and give it another try. I guess this isn't something a reviewer can do since the work is time sensitive.

I think writers need to remember to keep personal feelings separate from their work. Yes, we work for months or years on a manuscript and it becomes our baby but it's not who we are. Maybe keeping focus on the reason we write could help with this.

A.J.-Yes you are right,with books from the publisher through Net Galley for example,we try for release dates for the review, so it is time sensitive sometimes. As far as 3 star reviews-the site I review for considered those to be entertaining, well written books. Four was a book you should add to your personal library and five was pretty much, WHOA!Great read. But now without the stars, that doesn't matter anymore.

Stars are such pretty, pretty distractions. I can't help but let them color my judgment when I first discover a book, but at the same time I know that some of my favorite books of all time have star ratings that average out to the 3 to 3.5 range. That's because the authors were trying something different, or taking chances that made people unhappy. Books that can inspire both passionate love and hatred in equal amounts end up with middling star ratings, but they don't deserve to be called bad books. They just need to find their true audience.

Personally, I wish I could be one of those writers who refuses to read reviews of his own work. But the game these days is to get as many reviews as possible, and lately I've been putting more effort into that than into writing my next book. So I can't help but look them over as they come in.

@Lorna I like the fact that you don't post a star rating on your book reviews. I do a lot of movie reviews, and I don't use a star rating either. My reviews have 2 sections. "What is it about?" and "You will like it if..." Something like this is very subjective, and what I personally enjoy may not be what you enjoy.

I don't put much stock in ratings of books. The actual reviews do help with picking books though. I love well written negative reviews because they outline the flaws in the book. If I'm interested in the subject and the flaws in the negative reviews don't bother me then I will probably get that book. I don't really trust books that have no negative reviews.

This is a thought provoking thread, that's for sure. My blog (and future YouTube) reviews don't carry stars because of this reason. Too many things can go wrong with a rating system.

Michael, You make such a great point. I totally agree.

I published Ben the Dragonborn this fall and quickly became aware of the practice of author swaps when someone asked me to do one with her. I looked at the book and it was mediocre at best, but had 12 five star ratings. That was the day I decided not to participate in author swaps. WhAt I don't like here at Goodreads is you can give a book a rating with no explanation about what you liked and didn't like about a book. Actually I did that myself for books I read before joining Goodreads. Where it becomes a problem for new writers like me is when your book is brand new and you haven't paid for a bunch of positive reviews, or participated in author swaps and someone gives your book a low rating. When you have just a few ratings it drags the overall rating down and makes your book look very unappealing to prospective readers. It wouldn't be so bad if they also left a review saying what it was they did not like about the book. Then you would know that they had a actually read the book and why they did not like it.

Yes Dianne, I have heard of people that just give bad reviews because they can. Not because they actually read the book. That is really not fair-maybe there should be a rule that if you give a 1 or 2 star review you need to explain why.

Well to answer the question, I don't generally pay attention to reviews and ratings, I read the blurb and sample and decide for myself if a book interests me.

That being said, I cannot fathom why an author would say they are great... This would put me off immediately because it smacks of narcissism. Personally, I never say I am a great writer, I never say my books are great. What I will say is what you can expect out of the book, what genre or genres to expect, I might go so far as to say if you like this type of book you might like mine. But I never say it's great. I'm gonna let you make up your mind about that.

That's just weird.

While I'm at it, on the subject of "revenge reviews", I do not understand what goes in someone's head when they do this sort of thing. For one thing, as long as a reviewer is giving their honest opinion, I don't really get mad about it. I've received a one star review, the reviewer called the book a "jumbled mess". This did not anger me. I'm sorry he didn't like it, but he gave his honest feeling about it, I feel no need to "get revenge". That's just petty and silly and really has no place in adult society, IMO.

Now if someone's leaving a bad review because they're angry in some way, that I do have a problem with. One reviewer left a bad review because she "doesn't support his extreme views" (whatever that means), and I have tried to get that review stricken from Amazon because she explicitly states she never read the book. But they won't take it off.

As long as someone is giving their sincere opinion, good or bad, they are okay by me.

Wow, I never thought of the stars rating system like that before, but it totally makes sense. Ive reviewed a couple books and collections on my blog, but I never put a value (_/_stars) on them before. I simply state what I liked/ disliked about the book or collection. That way when people come across my reviews they see my opinion, yes, but they can make up their own mind about what i'm reviewing. I usually have more good things to say and like one critique if anything haha.
But yeah, its very interesting how damaging a rating system could be. Never even thought about that before. Good to know.

Jevon wrote: "I think writers need to remember to keep personal feelings separate from their work. Yes, we work for months or years on a manuscript and it becomes our baby but it's not who we are."

Absolutely. If you put something out there for people to read, especially if you're asking them to pay for it, you have to accept that they might not like it, and might want to say so, and that is their right. If they have paid for (or legitimately obtained) a copy, that copy is theirs to talk about however they want - it's not the author's 'baby' at all any more, but an item that is for sale like any other. The author might not like that, but that's how it is and they have to accept that if they are going to publish something.

A book (physical or otherwise) is a product like any other, and people are free to comment on the products that they buy. As long as it isn't overly personal or abusive towards the author themselves, anything they want to write is fine. As an author, I might not like, or agree with, what they say, of course, but as a 'professional' in 'business' (even if it's only on a very small scale - if I'm selling stuff, that's what I am in that context) I have to bite my tongue and move on if that happens.

Nobody can write something genuinely liked by everyone who reads it - I'm a little suspicious of any author who seems to be claiming that by having lots of 5* reviews and nothing else! The ratings from just a few reviews can be highly damaging, unfortunately, but that just goes with the territory of honesty!

Reviews do influence me, but more so the blurb and the writing sample. Maybe I'm naive, but I never really look at a 5-star review as fake. I just assume that the person loved the book. But it doesn't help me decide. I like to go to the 2- or 3-star reviews because the reviewers that write those usually delve into the meat of why they did or didn't like it. Then I use that to decide if I want to read it or not.

When I first started my review blog, I was only reading blurbs. I asked for a book or two that I ended up, within the first paragraph, realizing that I wouldn't like. Usually it's because the writer hasn't honed his or her craft or it's because he or she isn't writing a story that interests me (even though the blurb made it sound like I would). Blurbs are so subjective, and people hire that out all the time. They're factual--"This story is about this"--but they don't showcase the writer's talent. Even if they're written by the writer.