GOOD REVIEWS discussion

As authors what are you expecting when people review your books? As reviewers, what is the best way you found to write your reviews?

As an author, I would like honest criticism that is constructive so I can improve my writing skills.
Also if they are willing to give suggestions as to what is lacking or what is too much.

The first book in a series is now available on Amazon/Kindle Direct. The title is Clash of Cultures, the Legend of Henson Wiseman and the Dakota Chiefs.
It is a historical fiction based on true stories, events, and real people. If you would like to review contact me.

Steve wrote: "The first book in a series is now available on Amazon/Kindle Direct. The title is Clash of Cultures, the Legend of Henson Wiseman and the Dakota Chiefs.
It is a historical fiction based on true st..."

I'm interested. Is it available in physical as well?

Honesty is the answer to both questions.
As an author I look for honest reviews, even when the reader doesn't like the book.
As a reviewer, I try to give honest reviews. Whether it's science, literature, history, or fantasy. The only exception is for masters of the craft, who I have no business criticizing, and only seek to learn from. Though I do give plenty of reflections in those cases.

I always appreciate when a reviewer of one of my books has a bias of some sort and they admit to it -- for example, if they're not an RVer (my books feature a retired, full-time RVing couple who solve mysteries), it helps me to understand if they didn't like a lot of RV detail; if they know the geography of the setting and believe I've misrepresented it -- those sorts of comments are helpful.

So when I'm reviewing, I try to do that myself. I'm confident in my ability to critique plot, style, characterizations, etc -- but who am I to say if the streets in Paris are all wrong?

I agree with Caitlin about being honest; being transparent is also a good idea.

Amanda wrote: "As authors what are you expecting when people review your books? As reviewers, what is the best way you found to write your reviews?"

Honesty is the key.

As an author I expect a fair and honest review of my work. A review isn't a college book report and you don't have to retell the story. What's more important to me as a writer is how my writing affected you. What did you learn, how did my words affect you and what emotions did you come away with after reading?

It's interesting to me that so many beginning writers (especially novelists) will publish a book, then look to the reviewers as they would a critique group. Yes, we can all improve -- but I'm curious about how others see the primary role of a reviewer: it to advise other readers whether to spend time reading the book, or to improve as a writer?

Interesting comment, Ellen Behrens! Of course, you're right. By the time the novel is published it's too late to integrate readers' views. A comment that strikes home might be tucked away and put to use for a new WIP. As you point out, there is a distinct difference between peer reviews and reader reviews. Aside from two critique groups, I'm also a member of Pacific Northwest Writers Association. Those are all peer reviewers, meaning writers are critiquing my work. A nonwriter/reader's fresh look might reveal something I wasn’t aware of. So, yes, there is value in that for a novelist. However, the main purpose of writing a book review is reader-to-reader communication. And this is what has been so liberating about book review sites like Goodreads, Amazon and others. Readers no longer need to wait for a professional reviewer, i.e., an authoritarian voice, to tell them the artistic merit of a work. The reader has been empowered as reviewer. Every voice is heard, and each voice counts as much as the next. I call that democracy in action!