Modern Good Reads discussion

Lynne wrote: "...If my writing didn't work for them, I want to know what it is that didn't connect. It might be something I can work on. It's always a good thing to get as much input as possible and then weigh it up and see if it can be put to use."

FYI: Still Ranting

Reviews are NOT written for authors. They are written for readers. Reviews are NOT written for authors. They are written for readers.
If you are an author and you want to read them - go for it, but understand you have no right to make demands or even suggestions on how a reader does their review.

I don't know what else I can say to get authors to understand. Readers pay for your book. They can if they choose to - review their book. You have no right to tell them what to do with it - they own it now. They can use it to hold up a shelf if they want. If they read it and do other readers the favor of providing an honest opinion that is up to them. They already paid you - they don't owe you anything.

Authors complain they need reviews. When readers review they are criticized for not doing it right, for rating books wrong, for not providing enough information and for providing too much information. Of course we can't forget the insinuation there are nasty motives for every bad review.

Honest reviews are the last thing most authors want. They want reviews to say what they want to hear.

Again, I can only speak for myself. I said earlier that I find reviews helpful and I do. I am happy with honest ones, even honest bad ones. I would prefer an honest review to one that praised my book when the author hated it. I have had a number of one star ratings for one of my books and there's only one I had a problem with and I believe there's a reason to think that the man concerned did the wrong thing there.

I have never said I am 'owed' reviews of any sort. I appreciate feedback. If I don't get it, that's fine. It's nice when I do. The only thing I definitely don't appreciate, which I stated earlier, are reviewers who put the entire plot of a book in their reviews without flagging spoilers. As you said, reviews are primarily for readers, so if they have the story spoiled for them, I consider that a bad thing. Any other review, however, I appreciate.

I'll also add that my reviews are written for both readers AND authors. I believe in providing feedback for both. Some reviews might be written for one or the other, but I think it depends on the reviewer themselves.

Lynne wrote: "...I would like you to look through my previous remarks and point out where I said I was 'owed' reviews of any sort..."

You stated in the previous post:
"...This is why I often have trouble with people just rating rather than leaving a review, especially if they've given me a low rating. If my writing didn't work for them, I want to know what it is that didn't connect..."

I interpreted the comment "I want to know what it is that didn't connect..." as you felt they OWED you an explanation.

No one owes any author an explanation for what they do or don't do when rating or reviewing their book.

Back on topic:

I agree reviewers should not regurgitate the entire book when they review because it spoils it for other readers. Of course other readers can usually spot these and will often skip reading that review. Most readers have a clue and know what they're doing.

Again it's the reviewers choice how they review and the readers choice what to consider. Authors have no place in this equation.

No, I don't feel I'm owed anything. It would be nice to get some feedback, but I'm just happy to know that they thought my book was interesting enough to try. :-)

Lynne - Just one comment. Many reviewers I know and I have done this myself - will PM an author if they feel there are real issues with a book. They will still review and rate accordingly, but usually will not get into a lot of details in the review.

My understanding from the way Goodreads operates is that I, as an author, am not supposed to encourage conversation with reviewers about their reviews. I'm certainly not supposed to initiate it and my understanding is that I'm not supposed to get into any if it's sent my way either. That was the impression I got, anyway.

I don't enjoy reviews that include a synopsis. I find the practice annoying.

Great discussion, but it's gone off track. Please can we pull it back. Thanks.

I love the synopses where they are short, but give a little more insight into what the book is about without giving the story away. Mainly I want to know what the reviewer loved about the book. Spoilers are okay as long as they aren't plot twist spoilers that spoil the book, but I prefer no spoilers, just lots of teasers! But do tell me there is a twist. :)

Wow! Lots of activity since I last looked here. For the record, what I was saying was that I do not believe a synopsis belongs in a review. I will stand by that vehemently even if it means aggravating a precious and obviously thin-skinned reviewer. A line or two which is synopsis-like is not a synopsis especially if it adds a critical tidbit that is valuable to a potential reader. I was referring to the people who literally write their own synopsis as part of the review.

I believe the argument that reviewers can do anything they want to do as a form of defending a synopsis in a review is ridiculous. Of course they can. I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying they shouldn't. They CAN add long passages from the dictionary or verbiage from the warning labels on their hair dryers. But they shouldn't.

I'm still trying to figure out who are all of these readers that are reading reviews of a book without having first read the synopsis in the first place.

I would also like to point out that I wrote the original post as a potential reader, not an author. Maybe I'm just too anal retentive to only scan through a review, but the effect it had on me was not to start sifting through portions of reviews, but rather to stop reading them altogether. In fact, I did not buy that book, so it could be that positive reviews actually deterred me from purchasing. Before you start complaining about that one, I said, "COULD BE." I'm not saying that a synopsis in a review kills sales. I'm only saying it annoys me and that it doesn't belong there.

I also agree that just a rating for a book is nearly useless to me. I think you really have to read the reviews to get the information you want. I once read a product review that trashed the product only because shipping was slow. That is not a review of the product but rather a review of the seller or shipper. Again, the reviewer CAN review it any way he sees fit. But he shouldn't. And as a potential buyer of the product, I might have had an artificially bad outlook on the product for no good reason.

This is my opinion. Unlike most people I am open to having that opinion changed, however I have read nothing here to change it. I'm certain those that disagree would say the same. Which is a shame because I cannot pass a law forbidding the practice, so the best I can hope for is that I sway just that one open-minded person to reconsider the practice.

I do not like spoilers or what becomes basically book reports. I do share reviews with friends and their first question is" What is the book about"? not" How well was it written" etc. I do try to be very brief in the summary.

Tammy wrote: "I do not like spoilers or what becomes basically book reports. I do share reviews with friends and their first question is" What is the book about"? not" How well was it written" etc. I do try to b..."

So add the synopsis to what you send them instead of asking every person that visits the site to read your synopsis along with the other 20 people who wanted to summarize it.

You say you don't like spoilers. Why is it easy to skip over a synopsis and not a spoiler. Why don't you just skip over them?

Tammy.. That is an excellent question!! Unfortunately, I can not answer it, as I, too, have the same question.

Several comments here about things that I just read.. I'm only a reviewer, but it work closely with authors and have many authors as friends. I agree that authors should read reviews. Reviews are your fans speaking to you. Should you take one or even several reviews, whether good or bad, to heart. No, I don't believe you should. You certainly can't please everyone. There's something to say about seeing the big picture and that's what authors should do in regards to reviews of their books.

Is proper grammar important? Absolutely! Do I always use it? Nope, but neither am writing a book that readers are paying for. I strive to write well in my reviews but I am human and make mistakes. I proff my reviews at least four times and always again after making changes and again prior to posting. And then... It NEVER fails.. I read the posted review and find at least one mistake.. UGGH! Do I expect authors to be perfect? No way. Neither do I expect betas and editors to be perfect. However when certain grammar and writing rules are disregarded, for whatever reason, to the point that it makes the book confusing, then the mistakes are going to be a major issue for me, as a reader and as a reviewer.

I definitely agree that a book synopsis included with the review makes for a long review. As a reader, I will skip exceptionally long reviews. I just want to know about other readers' reading experience. If I'm at the point of reading the reviews, I have already read a synopsis. I think this is generally true of most people.

Spoilers.. I hate them and do try to avoid them. It's great when the review indicates at the beginning that it contains spoilers. When it does not, the spoilers can sneak up on you and before you know know it, you've read it.. Lol

FSOG... You either love it or hate it. I'm in the category of loving it! I've read it NINE times, can't wit for the movie and just recently bought a charm bracelet. I'm a coffee drinker and an presently looking for a coffee mug with a specific phrase..

I have faith in an enjoyable book again. This is Margaret "Madge" Shelton story during the brief reign of Anne Boylin. Even though I have read this time period numerous times, I still found myself not wanting to put the book down so I could see what happens next. What better compliment can one give? I recommend this and will be rereading this.(less) This is a recent review I gave. No spoiler, brief summary.

@Russell. I must be mistaken. I thought a synopsis was a brief summary of what the book is about whereas a spoiler tells what is in the book/story sometimes the story itself. I gave an example of one of my reviews. I believe I will continue.

According to the Merriam-Webster English Dictionary:

Reviewer - A writer* of critical reviews.

*Writer - One who writes as a business or occupation.

Professional writers and reviewers know how to write and review; and generally adhere to well-established rules and criteria pertaining to their trade. So, not very long ago, a debate such as this would have been unnecessary.

The invention of the personal computer and the internet has rendered the tradtional definitions of writer and reviewer moot. So, technically at least, anyone with access to a PC and the internet may claim the title of writer and/or reviewer and write and/or review in any manner they so desire and feel is correct. No amount of debate will convince them to do otherwise.

True...

I'm with Jim. I also think that reviews are like movie trailers now: there's no need to see the movie as it's all there in the trailer; it's the same with reviews that provide a synopsis. I will stop reading the review if it gets too detailed in re-telling the story. I want to experience the story myself, not through Cliff Notes. I also think it's hard to tell a story without "telling a story." In other words, truly writing a good review takes time, which is why I generally avoid them altogether.

Tammy wrote: "@Russell. I must be mistaken. I thought a synopsis was a brief summary of what the book is about whereas a spoiler tells what is in the book/story sometimes the story itself. I gave an example of o..."
If you had left the second sentence out, your review loses nothing.

Jim wrote: "According to the Merriam-Webster English Dictionary:

Reviewer - A writer* of critical reviews.

*Writer - One who writes as a business or occupation.

Professional writers and reviewers know how t..."

Amen, Jim. Well said and so true.

Russell wrote: "Tammy wrote: "@Russell. I must be mistaken. I thought a synopsis was a brief summary of what the book is about whereas a spoiler tells what is in the book/story sometimes the story itself. I gave a..."

Noted. Thank you.

IMO giving a synopsis is the mark of a poor reviewer. The point of a review is not to summarize, but to critique.

i keep my reviews short and sweet, quite a few of them are 4 words long. some summary is ok, but when you summarise so much its basically a spoiler, no good.
debating over books is retarded. i dont particularly care for lengthy critiques of books. u either liked it or you didnt. maybe if u spent less time critiquing books you could write a book that contains what you want to read. write whats been missing in all the books youve disliked. capice

"Critique" is not equivalent to "criticism"! You might also look up the definition of "retarded" while you're at it.

I agree with you entirely. Critique is not about liking or disliking but about appreciating the nuances and analysing the many shades of grey. No one has a right to a 'final word'. All books have value in a certain context. The critique's role is to look at the bigger picture - to look beyond his/her nose.

I wish more people who buy my book would take the time to rate and review it on Amazon where it counts, and on this site where it's helpful to the reading community. (I did say wish, not expect, and the reason is reviews can indeed help a writer connect with their audience.)

The best reviews say why a person enjoyed a book, or why they didn't, without giving away more of the plot than is in the blurb, so keeping them short makes sense.

Responding to a review, unless it's with a thank you if that facility is available, is unwise. However you feel about it, it's only one person's opinion.

If you pay for a professional review that is entirely different, and it is up to the individual writer to check the reviewer's qualifications to give a full and informed opinion.

Yes, Vinod, right on. Thats what I meant.
And by the way, in over ten years of professional reviewing I never gave a novel a negative review. If I didn't like it I didn't review it. Non-fiction's different. I just figure it takes so much work to write a novel, why trash it?

Russell wrote: "I'm here to ask you to cut it out. I read somewhere that if the review contains a synopsis that it was probably written by the author or his surrogate, however, I just read a bunch of reviews for ..."

There are times, usually when the book is older, when the Goodreads and Amazon description doesn't actually contain any clue about what the book contains. If the reviews also don't contain any synopsis elements, then readers who don't have access to the physical book may have difficulty deciding whether they want to read it. In that case, it's definitely in order to include a bit of summary in the review as guidance. I also often include a bit of summary in my blog reviews because there is usually no description in a blog context and my readers may be unfamiliar with the book.

But readers don't NEED a summary, just a general idea of what the book is about.

Not tooting my own horn, but here are some of my book reviews if anyone's interested:


http://marsheiner.wordpress.com/book-...
http://marsheiner.wordpress.com/book-...
http://marsheiner.wordpress.com/book-...

The exception to what I've said is this review, in which I do give away the plot, but it's because I used the book for a broader discussion:
http://marsheiner.wordpress.com/book-...

Marcy wrote: "But readers don't NEED a summary, just a general idea of what the book is about."

Marcy wrote: "Not tooting my own horn, but here are some of my book reviews if anyone's interested:


http://marsheiner.wordpress.com/book-...
http://marsheiner.wordpress.com/book-......"

When I say a bit of summary, I do mean a brief idea of what the book is about. I do sometimes include a bit more than that because it's relevant to my discussion, but I never include what I would consider spoilers. Spoilers are so subjective though.

Re giving away the plot--The example you give is a classic. People tend to be more tolerant of spoilers in reviews of classics. Earlier works of literary criticism have thoroughly spoiled classics and at great length long before any current review.

Reviews help an author know more about their readers, and what they like, or don't like, which is why I said I value them.

Unlike some writers I don't add at the end of my eBook "please rate and review". Somebody said earlier that once a person has bought a book they can do what they like with it, including using it to prop up the furniture. You couldn't do that with an eBook obviously, but the principle is the same.

Readers don't actually need reviews to judge an eBook when they can read as much, or as little, as they like of the first 3 chapters, either on Amazon or by downloading a sample.

Some readers like to see reviews. I do myself, as a reader. It's often what makes me decide to read the sample, though that would be the decider whether to buy or not.

I applaud you Sarah for your restraint....I almost said modesty, or humility, but those aren't quite the right words....for not begging for reviews.

and Shomeret, thanks for pointing out the difference when it comes to the classics.

Modesty and humility aren't right at all, Marcy :-)

I do agree that writers have no right to expect reviews, and some of the entries at the back of books read more like orders than requests.

Before I began writing... years ago because I am published under my own name, short stories and non-fiction... it never occurred to me to review books and I regret that now. It would have cost me nothing but a minute or two of my time and I might have benefitted if the author had taken on board what I said because I often bought their next book.

I don't mean "This novel fizzled out at the end. I regret buying it." More like, "I would have enjoyed reading a bit more about what happened to the characters". That reveals nothing of the plot, gives prospective readers a hint that I enjoyed the book, but tells the author the end was rushed and he/she could have gone on a little longer.

Deciding where to stop without leaving readers feeling either let-down or bored isn't an easy decision to make. Dangerous Liaisons is my debut novel and I rewrote the end several times before I was happy I had the balance right. If you'd like to read it and see if you agree, it's available free from October the first for five days.

www.amazon.com/dp/B00M9CU1Z6

Marcy wrote: "Yes, Vinod, right on. Thats what I meant.
And by the way, in over ten years of professional reviewing I never gave a novel a negative review. If I didn't like it I didn't review it. Non-fiction's d..."

Marcy, you are made of special stuff!

Aw gee thanks....blushing.

When I read a review, I'm looking to see that the reviewer read the book. That will be shown by critical analysis, along with their opinion and why they felt a particular way. A summation by itself would be annoying, because it would be redundant and giving information that has already been given by the author/publisher.

I look for insight into the book. A summation from a reviewer doesn't provide that, and could indicate the reviewer didn't read it.

I must confess, when I was reviewing regularly for print, I was panicked during my reading, afraid I'd have absolutely nothing to say. I overcompensated by making tons of notes in the margins and underlining half the book. Then when it was time to write the review I found the whole thing pouring out of me without even looking at my notes, except to cite quotations.

I think a lot of people might be scared about having nothing to say, which sometimes leads to these summaries or even criticisms they don't really mean. Maybe.

Interesting, Marcy

That is totally different from "rate & review" on, for example, Amazon.

If someone did it for me I would expect to pay, and you could say what you liked because I wouldn't have submitted a book unless the review was to be sent to me privately.

My comments really only apply to professional book reviewing, paid for by the publication, which is why I had that panic reaction--the reviews were assigned like other articles. Very different from authors paying reviewers (which was thought of as unethical back in the day) and/or the casual reader posting reviews on Amazon or Goodreads.

"Paying a reviewer" is open to misunderstanding.

I meant someone who had been an agent, publisher, or was in some other way qualified to judge, would offer a service: to read a draft, point out plot and character errors, and suggest improvements.

Whether the author took their advice would be choice, but the charge would be made upfront.I can think of a number who advertise this service.

Whether or not it helps, or is ethical, I have no idea: I do know the prices they quote are high, and the "review" would not be made public.

Oh. Thanks for the clarification. I actually do that but I call it one of my editorial services.
These days, tho, people DO pay others for reviews.

Have a query here. Cant we give a gist of the story without revealing the suspense in the review? Since the review is posted on blog also, the reader can get an idea on what the story line is and then what the reviewer feels of the book. Please correct me if I am wrong. I have newly started reviewing and would like to improve on it

Editorial Services describes paid work perfectly, Marty.

I think the word "review" has been misused several times in the course of this discussion, or misunderstood.

To me a review consists of a rating and a few words on Amazon, and they do verify that the person reviewing has at least purchased the book.

Goodread reviews aren't limited to purchased books and they can be quite long, which too often results in giving away too much.

Agreeing to make a book available for review as Book of the Month, as I have with Dangerous Liaisons, is different. Readers posing questions can't help but give away at least part of the plot, though I hope it won't include the ultimate spoiler of revealing the end. Perhaps one of the moderators could clarify that point.

Sarah wrote: "Editorial Services describes paid work perfectly, Marty.

I think the word "review" has been misused several times in the course of this discussion, or misunderstood.

To me a review consists of a ..."

The definition of a review is apparently very subjective. As a reader, I want to find a good reason to read the book. You may say that I should read the sample, but there are too many books for me to expend the effort to read all their samples. I won't even consider the sample unless something has piqued my interest. If the description doesn't do that, then I start scanning reviews looking for what will probably be a spoiler. It will be some information about the central character, the themes of the novel, the setting or the plot that strikes me as significant or unusual. When I myself review the book, I will mention what convinced me to read it. It will often be the opening sentence of my review. If I liked the book, I hope that this persuades other readers with similar tastes to read and discuss it with me. Since Goodreads is a social networking platform for readers, readers want to form connections over books. That is why Goodreads reviews are different from reviews on bookselling sites like Amazon.

Fair comment, shomeret.

Mostly I buy books through my Kindle. It's an old one so book covers are black/grey/white and don't influence me at all. If a title interests me I click on "more" to see the full blurb. I never download a sample unless that appeals.

Since I joined Goodreads I've clicked on a link to a book if there is one, and then I notice the rating. The blurb is still the deciding factor about reading more. Like you, I don't have time to read endless sample chapters.

I rarely read reviews in case they are spoilers: it's down to the author to sell me the book with the blurb, and that should say enough to give me an idea of the story.

I often encounter books on my Goodreads friends' feed. Since I don't agree with my GR friends completely, I still have to decide whether the book will interest me. I put out the effort to look at reviews in addition to description if I see that more than one GR friend has liked the book. So my friends have induced me to examine the book more closely than I might otherwise, but I still need to find the one thing that will hook me enough to read the sample. Sometimes I don't find out that a book contains something I find really intriguing for months or even years. I'll come across it in a new review and exclaim "Now you tell me!"

The point of this post is that authors often want to conceal unique aspects of their books because they want people to read the book and discover them. Yet in this crowded market, the unique aspect is what sells the book. So I look for the spoiler review that will tell me about it.

People read reviews so they can get an idea of what the book is about. So, it's really important to write in our reviews a little bit about the story. But just a little bit. Also, it's really important to say what we think of the book, if we liked it or not and why. That is in the end what makes a review a good review. But it's really important not to tell the end! otherwise the surprise is ruin. We don't want no spoilerers!

I don't want a full summary and definitely no spoilers, however, I want more than just "well-written", "good stories," "can't wait for the sequel" or "How do I nominate this for the Pulitzer Prize?" I'd like some examples or I figure it's just the author's sister trying to boost his review numbers.

Belén wrote: "People read reviews so they can get an idea of what the book is about. So, it's really important to write in our reviews a little bit about the story. But just a little bit. Also, it's really impor..."
I agree that you don't reveal the end in a review, Belén. That's my definition of a spoiler. Yet many readers and authors consider any details about the book that weren't in the description spoilers. If the description is extremely vague, how do reviewers give examples of why we liked the book without "spoiling" it? It's impossible.