Bisky's Twitterling's Scribbles! discussion

As well as a now self-published author, I'm also a book review blogger. I got into reviewing books in October of last year, when I was thinking of a non-painful set of topics to base a blog on. Nothing else really appealed (or appeals) to me, and I like to feel as though I'm helping the community. After all, reviews are our currency.

However, something just happened that made me question whether I want to continue as a reviewer or not. It might be the raging pregnancy hormones (omg, we're almost there ...) or a fit of pique or maybe it's something important I should pay attention to. I just don't know. You guys can set me straight.

So I'm going to keep this anonymous, so you don't think I'm just telling tales. If you wanted to figure out who/what books I'm talking about, you can always hunt down my blog and with very little detective work, figure it out. But still, I don't want to be all blabby mouth here.

When I first started my blog, I wrote a one-star review of a bestseller. I really didn't like it. It took me 8 months to get through, and if I'd read it now, it would go on my DNF list.

I'm on the street team of an author who writes in the same genre. Her second book is coming out soon, so I got a Netgalley copy and reviewed it. In the review, I compared it to Bestseller and noted that it was a lot better than Bestseller.

She emailed me to thank me for the review and explain that Bestselling author is a good friend of hers, so she can't promote my review. There's already been hurt feelings over reviews comparing Up-and-Coming Author's book to Bestseller's book, and she doesn't want to rock the boat.

That's fine.

Except, now I'm thinking about everything I've ever said in the context of any review ever.

I'm very big on being honest in my reviews. And I would expect honesty about my book, as well. I think that it's important that reviewers tell the good and the bad, and shoppers can decide if they like it. I mean, if I say, "I didn't like this book because it was all sunshine and kittens" (which I've said before), someone might be like, "Oh, I like sunshine and kittens. I will buy this book."

But where does one draw the line? In my honest review about Up-and-Coming Author's book, I said it wasn't as engrossing as her first book. I did say a lot of nice things, and in her explanation of why she can't share my review, she apologized and said she thought my review was "generous."

But that's a word that means ... What?

So, am I too honest in my reviews? And furthermore, maybe it's a conflict of interests.

If I'm trying to get out there and make contacts in the book world, maybe writing reviews is a bad idea. First of all, I'm two degrees away from Bestselling Author. What if she were to have read my review and gotten all upset about it and decided to somehow rally people again me? Career over. (Not that I think she would do that. I'm just a gnat on the backside of a hippo here. NOT THAT I'M CALLING HER A HIPPO.)

But you see what I mean?

Any books that I DNF or that I really had major issues with, I won't review. I've had to inform one person whose review I accepted that I was going to give him 2 stars because his book offended me. And he opted not to have me do that review. Which is fine. But then there's all the grey area--the 3 or 3.5 or even 4 star books. Obviously I didn't love it if I'm not giving it 4.5 or 5 stars. (At least, that's how many rating system goes.)

So am I overthinking this? Or should I consider, as an author myself, getting out of book reviews?

This is a really difficult topic, S. Especially because you are using the same name for both reviewing and writing. With that said, sometimes we overthink it. Books aren't golden coins, meaning we aren't all going to love all of them. Writers should know this. Reviews should be honest and as long as you are being honest, there's nothing else to think about. Like I said at the beginning though, you are in a unique position because you are an author too, which can make your status as a reviewer a bit more difficult to understand. I would tell you not to overthinking it, but then again you are the one that needs to feel comfortable with your decision.

Hello. I really sympathise. I'm a bit further behind - just about to put my first (first published, not first written :) ) book on Kindle and also reviewing. I already review established authors on Goodreads and my website etc. but am just about to embark on reviewing more ebooks and new authors.

I think you have to be honest. I agree with M.C. we aren't all going to love every book. I try to be constructive if I can and to find good things. There are usually some even if overall I give the book a low rating. See my review of Waiting for Wednesday for instance.

I am very conscious of the sensitivities of newish authors, especially, and that's where the constructive criticism comes in. As one myself, I do worry about whether I'll damage my own chances if I give less than glowing reviews. But as M.C. says being honest is the guiding star. You have to be true to yourself.

I think your idea of asking people if they'd prefer you didn't do that review is good. I've done that before now. But time is precious and we do put in a lot of time as do those who review us. I don't think a three star and certainly not a four is bad. It depends on what you say in the review.

Good luck and I'm looking forward to reading your reviews. Trust your instincts. They'll always be right.

This is something I thought about a lot recently. I lost an active member of this community over the negative review I gave him. I think he took it personally, but he asked for all my feedback since I said I wouldn't post it publically. But his book offended me, it bashed a category of people that most of my best friends can be seen inside. I'm not a big fan of intolerance, even though he said it was subconicious, it was pretty easy for me to see. But I knew his usual readership wouldn't notice/care. I gave him a few ways to fix it but since then I've not seen him on any of my social media platforms. Which makes me a little sad, and is why I decided I'd just skip over books that offend me or I couldn't finish. And I'll only post reviews of books I really liked.

I was going to do it as a serious thing. Once or twice a week review. But now I'm only posting them every few months.

I don't think it's, for me, worth the hassle of posting negative reviews. For mainstream you have fandom attacks, for indie you can get supporter attacks.

But I'd still like to post them on my website every now and again, I usually get good feedback for my reviews from other readers who go on to get the book.

I've come back here a couple of times to reply, but I'm not really sure I have a good answer. If we are all mature adults, we can acknowledge that not everyone will like our books. I think that as long as a review is well-written, one should not take offense to a 'bad'review.

With that being said, author bullying is a real problem right now. I can certainly understand your fear of offending the wrong person.

I understand that there can be some politics in reviewing the work of other authors. I post reviews on my blog as well and definitely don't like being in the position of giving an author a negative review. I know how important reviews are, especially for indie authors.

All that being said, reviewers should feel the freedom to be honest. I feel that it's wrong of of an author to contact reviewer, try to get them to spin their opinion, or criticize them publicly. As authors I think we just have to take the good and the bad and say thank you. If an author can't handle criticism of their work, they don't belong in this arena.

For example, I had a reader (not a reviewer) post a 1 star review on my short story "Waves and War." To keep it brief, "Waves and War" is a short story about the Battle of Lake Erie during the War of 1812. It's a fictionalized (though historically accurate) account from the perspective of a young crewman in the battle. This is very obvious from the ebook's description. However, the reviewer's critique was solely based on the fact that my short story wasn't a history book like he thought it was and how readers would be better served reading other books if they wanted a thorough study of of the battle. As tempting as it was to contact this person to say that their review was unfair and unfounded, I just had to let it ride...and grumble privately to my friends ;)

I'm definitely not giving up reviewing in the next five minutes or anything, but everyone has given me something to think about. I do reviews 1-2 times a week on my blog, and I've got a bunch lined up and plan to do more as I finish more books. Review requests come almost exclusively from indie authors, so I do feel like I'm doing an important service. My following is almost non-existent, so I don't do it for the kudos, definitely. I like to feel as though I'm contributing to the community, and this makes me feel like that.

I am in the enviable position of having gotten my first one-star review on Amazon right after my book came out. I'm about 99% sure that the person didn't read it, that it was a vendetta review, mostly because it was so generic it was laughable. I was most worried that it was the start of an attack by the roving band of wild dingos that target self-pubbers, but it was the only one and it's been a month and a half. Still, I can't help but wonder who the guy is. Did I piss him off by saying something on Twitter? Did I give his buddy a bad review? Is he a sock puppet? That, too, has made me wonder if it's worth it.

Sometimes the toughest thing for me is keeping some comments to myself, so then at times, they slip out. Some of the books I've reviewed have been copy edited to perfection, but the story is dull and/or strays way too far from the three act structure without rhyme or reason or sanity. Sometimes I just want to scream, "You can shirk convention for artistry's sake, but only if you know what and why those conventions exist!" ... And other such observations. My observations still come out, but it's hard to know what line to draw where.

I guess my biggest question right now is where to draw the line. I've worked in corporate banking for years now, so I'm good at smiling and saying what needs to be said, a.k.a schmoozing if you're feeling generous, ass-kissing if you're being realistic. It doesn't even bother me. (OK, mostly. Mostly it doesn't bother me.) I thought it was OK to be a little bit more snarky with Bestsellers. If I'm questioning that line, what other lines should I be questioning?

Reviewing books can be a tough gig. I try not to be too opinionated with my reviews because I can usually see how someone else could enjoy the book even if I didn't. I mostly do movie reviews. I usually just try to give the readers a sense of if they will enjoy the movie if they go see it. It's a tough line to walk without injecting your own opinion.

I think you should stick with it and not worry so much about what others think. You should be writing for yourself first and foremost. Take comfort in those who do enjoy your work. If you get some constructive criticism then you can use that as a learning experience. Anything else is just rubbish that you can hopefully ignore because it belongs in the garbage can.

What is your motivation for writing reviews?

I think that is more important than whether the authors/friends/enemies of the authors like the review or not. Or whether your review is 'right' or written the 'right' way.

Do you write reviews because you want to share your love of books with friends?

Do you do it to attract new readers for your books?

Do you do it because it makes you feel good to pump up someone else's book?

Do you do it because you don't know how you feel until you've written it out?

None of them are 'good' or 'bad' reasons to right reviews. And by no means have I covered all of the possible motivations to write reviews. Identifying your own motivation may help you to answer your conundrum. Do you need a different platform? A different audience? A thicker skin? A better book?

I have often read a book based on negative reviews. As you say, one person's poison may be another's cup of tea. It is often a negative review that pushes me over the edge when I am deciding whether to buy a book.

Even bestsellers aren't going to suit everyone. As an author, you have to have a thick skin, or at least an understanding that a negative review is not the end of the world. And as a reviewer, you can't force the author to have that thick skin. You can never please everyone.

I like reviewing new books. It gives me the feeling I'm doing something worthwhile. Then again I also get to read some awesome stories without going to places like Amazon and stuff. It's a great experience reviewing, in my opinion.

The truth is it is very hard to be a reviewer and an author almost a conflict of interest situation and people do not like bad reviews I don't especially but I'm big enough and ugly enough to handle them, actually I'm not ugly at all. Some time ago I did a review of a Dorothy Sayers whodunit and I told it like it is, the Dorothy Sayers set in the girls college, the book isn't very good and I said so and the Dorothy Sayers fan club hounded me so I took it off and learnt a lesson there. Basically it is very hard to judge people even dead people.

Now that I am a published author I do not post negative reviews, period. If I didn't like the book, I just don't review it. I don't have to worry about being dishonest that way, and I don't have to worry about engendering bad feeling or provoking reprisals. I also don't mention another book negatively in comparison, for the same reasons.

Now if someone asks for feedback in private, I'll give them my honest opinion, but I'd always point out that everyone's opinions are different, and every book has an audience out there who will love it, it's just a matter of reaching them. For every person who has not liked my work, another reader has responded to say they loved it. So I know that no matter how I feel about someone's book, someone out there is going to like it, and every author, in addition to improving themselves, should also be focused on reaching those readers and connecting with them,

It's interesting to see different opinions on this. To David's comment about "I do not post negative reviews," it's perhaps a matter of perspective on what negative is. I always put both negative and positive in my reviews. If I didn't like it, I highlight the positives anyway. If I did like it, I highlight the things that I thought could be improved.

I do think I will stop posting any one-star reviews at all. I didn't have any planned, and if I would have done so, it would have been for bestselling, super-popular authors. It's really difficult sometimes, though--I found Anne Rice's Lives of the Mayfair Witches series absolutely terrible. I was disappointed because I had always heard so much about her work. I almost felt betrayed because a huge chunk of the first book broke one of the cardinal rules of book-writing: no info dumps. She literally had hundreds of pages of (REALLY BORING) history of this family, and it made me angry as a reader and as a writer. I think I gave that book two stars, and I wanted to rant about how offended I was.

I will need to decide what my cutoff is. Even a 3-star book is one that I didn't really enjoy nor would I consider reading more of their works. My 3.5 star rating is "maybe" and 4 stars is "when I get time, I would perhaps be interested in time/energy on additional novels." I'm always looking for the 4.5 and 5 star writers, the ones whose entire library I want to snort (to use a Bisky-ism). There are enough writers in the world that I'm not keen on spending too much time on the ones I don't feel excited about.

But I'm kind of digressing here!

I loved Anne Rice's vampire books. Wondered what the others were like. Thanks for the opinion. I wouldn't want to waste my time on a boring book yet again. How hard is it to write reviews? I thought about doing some simple and light ones about books I have read through my life.

i usually review books that I read. I don't do it for any reason other than can. However, I don't post any review less than 3 Star. I don't want to bash authors, so if I don't like the book, I simply don't post the review (although I do write it, just so I can get my thoughts about it down). I also don't tell the author, since I usually buy the books I review.

Am I doing a disservice by not posting negative reviews? I don't know, but I am not here to hurt anyone's aspirations.

S. wrote: "It's interesting to see different opinions on this. To David's comment about "I do not post negative reviews," it's perhaps a matter of perspective on what negative is. I always put both negative a..."

Sorry, let me clarify. A negative review (to me) is one which carries a rating of less than 3/5, i.e. an unfavorable rating, or is more negative in the text than positive. I may still have some constructive feedback in the text, but I'll probably phrase it in terms that place the onus on myself rather than the author, such as "I couldn't identify with this character" or "I didn't really get this plot development". But these will be kept to a minimum.

Basically, as a general rule of thumb, I'm only going to post a review the author would be happy to receive. If I think they might not like it, I don't post it.

If I think a 'self-published' book is worth only one star, I will try to find something good to say. I will not say it's terrible but I will try and be constructive. If I can't finish a book I don't post a review.

There has been one book that I didn't like, but I thought it was down to my personal literary tastes (aka it was very angsty and depressing and great if you're looking for a suicidal, depression prone character to identify with) I couldn't give that book a one star, even though I hated every page, so I found a reason to give it two.

I try and be constructive, particularly if I've received a book for free in exchange for an honest review. Most of the time, I try and give a review that I would want to receive.

I posted on this thread earlier and it's been fascinating and instructive to read all your comments. Something to think about in every one. I will continue to write reviews. Like S I always try to find something positive to say, even if I didn't enjoy the book as a whole. I do try to be more gentle with Indy authors. There are some books that are badly written or need an edit or five, but in that case I concentrate on the good things. However, I do think honesty is important as long as the negatives are balanced by positives. I'm more critical of established authors, though I always find something positive to say. I am just about to post a review of a book that the New York Times claims is written in
'lean graceful prose' whereas I found it muddled and cliche written. I always have a bit of a wobble before posting a review like that but if I'm not going to be constructively honest, why review at all?

I usually only post reviews of at least 3 stars out of 5. I always try to point out the bad points as well as the good ones. When I only find bad points, I don't write a review. I couldn't explain why exactly, I guess I just don't want to offend the writer. However, if the writer asks, I'd gladly tell him/her why I didn't like the book, but without posting anything.

Maybe (emphasis on this word), your mistake was to compare both books in your review.