Play Book Tag discussion

How many pages do you give a book? At what point to feel you should be captivated by the story and invested in the characters? Do you have different standards for different genres?

How many pages before you normally know how you will rate a book?

I do not have a set number of pages. I rarely abandon books. I used to always feel compelled to finish, but I have gotten a tiny bit better at abandoning a few. Usually this happens if I get to segments that are too graphic. I have a couple of "triggers" that sometimes I can power through, but other times I just decide life's too short to read things that will give me nightmares. I try my best to pick books I will enjoy, but it's not always easy to tell from the description.

I tend to like character-driven rather than plot-driven stories, so I am a patient reader. It takes a bit of time for an author to develop the characters, and I like to get to "know" them. I feel most decent authors can develop characters in the first quarter to third of the book. I do not have different standards for different genres.

My ratings are always done after I finish and are based on my personal reaction (not "perceived" merit). I get an idea early on, maybe a third to halfway through, but I save a final decision until the end. Sometimes the ending can bring the book up or down, especially if I'm on the fence.

I used to give books to 50 pages to wow me. These days, if I am not engaged in the beginning of the story or characters, it could be as little as two chapters in.

Some may think that isn’t enough time to get to know the characters. My thinking is, by two chapters, the writing style isn’t going to change. For example, James Patterson isn’t going to change to the style of Shakespeare ( no offense to Patterson. I am sure there are readers who love his books).

I don’t rate books unless I have read it cover to cover.

I feel that a person should enjoy what they are reading. If not, give yourself the ok to as Elsa in Frozen said “ Let it go!”.

I agree Book and gardens. My limit is three chapters, but it could be as little as one. I used to feel terrible if I left a book behind, no longer.

There are too many goods ones out there for me to waste the energy and time to read anything I find mediocre

It varies and it has changed over the years. I used to abandon if I wasn't interested quickly, but then I realized that sometimes one needed a little longer.

Even that has changed I once abandoned a book with 50 pages left because, I realized I just didn't care and that is one of my keys to abandonment, "Do you care about the characters in the book and what you are reading about?"

There are certain tropes which I dislike and I usually don't read books with those, but if I happen to and realize where it is heading I will dnf.

Some authors style just doesn't suit me and I will abandon a book because of it.

I finish 99,9 of the books I start. You might probably say that I am obsessive compulsive, but then I am careful which books I do start. Most of them have been on the waiting list for years, or are by one of my favorite authors. Anything new usually comes from a goodreads friend recommendation or the shortlist for a literary prize.
The only setback might be if I'm not sure what to pick next, then I read the first couple of pages and decide if I continue with the story or put it aside for later

Algernon (Darth Anyan) wrote: "I finish 99,9 of the books I start. You might probably say that I am obsessive compulsive, but then I am careful which books I do start. Most of them have been on the waiting list for years, or are..."
Me too!

Books and gardens wrote: "I used to give books to 50 pages to wow me. These days, if I am not engaged in the beginning of the story or characters, it could be as little as two chapters in.

Some may think that isn’t enough..."
I am very sensitive to writing styles, and if I don't like the style, the book won't get a high rating. I try not to put these "generic" books on my TBR, though they do occasionally slip through. I rarely read anything that is not well-written since that is one of my criteria for putting it on my list in the first place.

I don't read thrillers in general, unless it's for a PBT tag, so there's no worries about James Patterson appearing on my lists these days, not that he is a bad writer, but he's not writing them himself anymore. I really hate the whole "twists and turns" trope, which seems to be a requirement for thrillers - another reason for me to avoid them.

I used to finish every book and read every word, but I have become good at skimming, especially with nonfiction, where so many of the sentences are interpretations and summaries of the info. And I must admit I skimmed the last quarter or third of Fourth Wing, just to see what happened. I wasn't the right audience for that book that many people love.

With the situations in the world the last few years, I abandoned The Rabbit Hutch, A Constellation of Vital Phenomena, and The Seven Moons of Maali Almeida as too dark for the moment. I have also quit books if there was torture or other cruelty, though I can tolerate a lot more of that in fantasy (GOT, for instance) than in literary or historical fiction. If GOT had been about Nazis, I wouldn't have read past the first chapter.

There have been books I just couldn't get into, or they were poorly written, even ungrammatical. I don't have a set number of chapters or pages. The book I absolutely could not get into was Pilgrim at Tinker Creek. I felt like I had been reading for hours and I was only on page 30, it had all been describing a tree.

Sometimes a book just isn't right for the moment, or is too similar to another I just read, but later I'll come back to it.

My rating often changes up or down depending on how the book progresses and how it ends. I was going to give Wild Dark Shore 5 stars, but lowered it to 4.5 because of the ending.

I am a finisher and rarely abandon a book once started. In fact I am mostly rewarded for that patience such as recently when I read the amazing Embassytown by China Miéville. I read very broadly, have a high tolerance level for most anything. I might start one at some point and find it isn't right for that moment but I return to it. Case in point is my current reading of The Seven Moons of Maali Almeida.

But I tend not even to pick up books to read that I am unlikely to read all the way through - most horror, true crime, a lot of fantasy and scifi and NF. But I have absolutely no hard and fast rules. Or even vague ones.

I also read on an average of 160 books a year. Most get 3 stars or higher. Usually only a couple lower.

The last DNF I had was The Maple Murders, a YA Archie comic retelling. It was so bad, impossible to read. Sad part is it is a series by a writer who is a friend of a friend...

I think that was during Poll Tally challenge.

I think it is also important to mention that I have different policies between individual books and series longer than three books. I have given up on numerous series, even famous ones like Wheel of Time or Malazan Book of the Fallen, when I felt they turned bloated or repetitive. Of course, some series have given up on me, my waiting for the promised sequel counted in years. I'm looking at you, GRRM and at J V Jones in particular.

I'm not in school anymore, so I don't feel compelled to finish any book that either I don't enjoy or don't feel is worthwhile. That said, I don't have a hard and set rule regarding reading a set number of pages before abandoning a book.

My body usually tells me if a book is not for me. I find myself falling asleep while attempting to read such books. Or, I have a hard time retaining what I've read.

My first impression of a book usually endures. When a book has received wide acclaim by readers whose tastes are similar to mine, I'll sometimes try to reread a book that I've abandoned. Nine times out of ten, I'll DNF the same book again.

Goodreads ratings are personal and idiosyncratic. Since I DNF so many books, the books that I've rated 3-5 stars are good. 3 does not mean average to me. It merely means that I generally liked a book while having some mixed/negative reactions.

As far as when I rate a book, I wait until I finish it. I don't rate books that I DNF, although I do write reviews of them.

I have no set number of pages, chapters, paragraphs or sentences. BC (before children) I was a finisher. Once my reading time became something I had to work for plus stress factors I realized that life is too short. I still finish books I don't like at times, but far fewer, especially when I'm not playing a reading game with winners in it.

There are a few books I finished just to see if they would get better and what all the hype was about (Beautiful Ruins, Where the Crawdads Sing, and All the Light We Cannot See, for instance. At the end, I was sorry I did so, but I felt justified in writing a negative review.

Holly R W wrote: "I'm not in school anymore, so I don't feel compelled to finish any book that either I don't enjoy or don't feel is worthwhile. That said, I don't have a hard and set rule regarding reading a set nu..."

I am the same with 3 star reads, Holly. I did not hate it, but I did not love it. It fell in between for me, but I finished it, so that is a good sign.

Me too! If I give a book 3 stars, it means I liked it.

Part of my desire to finish has to do with being optimistic that it is going to get better! (For me, it has never had anything to do with being in school or having kids - those just meant I had less time to read for pleasure).

I absolutely love it when I open a book and I know that I’m in the presence of a five star read…. But what you’re asking is when you don’t have an experience and you are less than that. Well sometimes you think you’re reading a three and then it raises to a four. But what you might really be asking is how far do you have to get into a book before you know that you will turn it down. I have learned to DNF a book, but I still use that so rarely. I would say give it 20% in or 100 pages. Sometimes I have stayed with something because I knew I was using it for a prompt or a challenge or a tag. I don’t know what would have happened if I hadn’t had that requirement. I rarely read off my TBR unless it’s needed for a challenge. So it’s usually something I have been waiting to read. So the DNF is rare.

Algernon (Darth Anyan) wrote: "I finish 99,9 of the books I start. You might probably say that I am obsessive compulsive, but then I am careful which books I do start. Most of them have been on the waiting list for years, or are..."

I’m the same. I think I’ve only DNF’ed a book two or three times. A book has to really intrigue me before I will put it on my list, or been recommended by a trusted source, which kind of limits the risk of picking up a book I don’t like.
I always save my review/rating for the end, although I usually know about halfway through.

Joy D wrote: "Me too! If I give a book 3 stars, it means I liked it.

Part of my desire to finish has to do with being optimistic that it is going to get better! (For me, it has never had anything to do with be..."

I remember during a conversation with an author, she said, "Why do people think of 3 stars as bad? I see a 3-star rating for one of my books and am thrilled with it".

I don't believe in setting a page limit guideline for myself. I have read too many books that were slow starters but ended up being 4 or 5-star books. Having said that, if I'm really not enjoying a book I'll put it down ... and may never pick it up again LOL.

I rarely DNF. But I follow the "Nancy Pearl" rule.

Nancy says,

If you are 50 years or younger, you should read at least 50 pages before decided it's not the right book for you (or at least not the right book at this time).

If you are 51 or older, subtract your age from 100 and that's the number of pages you should give the book before setting it aside. So if you are 59, you'd read 41 pages. As Nancy says, "If you are 100 or older, you may judge the book by its cover!"

Of course, this guideline does NOT apply to books for a class assignment or a book club discussion.

==============================

For me, 3-stars means I liked it. It held my attention, I enjoyed the experience. I'm just not raving about it. A 5-star read has me buttonholing total strangers to get them to read it.

Most of my ratings are 3 stars and above -- and I like them for varying reasons.

2 star generally means there are redeeming features, something specific I liked that lifted it from a 1 star which means avoid at all costs.

I cannot DNF a book. It's very rare and in the few cases I have DNF, I probably gave it much longer than I should.

I give a book 100 pages before I start making judgements about the writing and the story. Few books change my feelings and rating after halfway through the book (there are some notable exceptions)

I do have different standards for different genres of books on how I rate them or feel about them. I expect Literary fiction to make me feel and to become the character or at the least, a best friend experiencing the events together. Scifi I want cool stuff and questions and intrigue. Classics, I want to walk into the room with you, study the interior. I want to sit down on the couch, fell the cushion sink and take that deep breath before the conversation begins 4 pages later.

3 stars is enjoyable to me, but I have some complaints. It's not a standard. A well written book may get a 3 star, but the story is ehhh. A good story but horrible writing might also get a 3 star. Right now, The Women is feeling like a 3 star. I hope it changes. I enjoy it, I like the social issues talked about. I haven't really liked the pacing or character development. When I have less to not like, the rating goes up.

Good point, Jason. For me, a 4-star Regency romance or cozy mystery is very different from a 4-star literary fiction. I give very few 5 star ratings, maybe 1 every 2 months, lots of 4's and 5's. Usually if it's a 2, I won't finish, but if it's for a group I will finish and gleefully write up my criticisms.

There is something to be said about a book so bad that it triggers an hilarious negative review. It's like the movie or play you saw that is so bad it becomes conversation at dinner and social events. I have a couple of those. And look how much fun those of us who are members of the Hates Wolf Hall Club have?

I never think of giving different ratings based on different genres, but perhaps it happens organically. I have a giant spreadsheet of all the books I've read since joining GR and when I rate a book, I make sure I "enjoyed" it as much as the other books I've given a similar rating. All the 3s - liked but had some issues, 4s - liked very much, and 5's - among my favorite books. It seems not to matter whether they are in a particular genre (although I read vastly more literary fiction, historical fiction, and non-fiction than anything else).

2's and 1's are rare. 2's are just okay and 1's are books I actively disliked.