SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

Just wondering what all of you think about writing reviews for the books you've read.

I have yet to write a review for a single book I've read. Partly because I don't feel competent enough to do so, but mostly because I figure no one would really care what I'd have to say about a book. And, since no one would really care, why bother? At least, that's my take on it.

What about the rest of you? Do you go out of your way to write a review for all the ones you've read, or even just for the really great ones? Or are you, like me, not into the whole review thing and why?

Sometimes I just write a review because the mood takes me...:). That doesn't mean I think I'm qualified to review...I seriously doubt I am.

In general, star rating is good enough. If I was going to buy the book, I'd check reviews, and ask a friend if they had read it and not written a review. If I received a book to review, I'd review it (as I did for John Sundman's Acts of the Apostles).

But I'm a lazy (insert your own noun), so something has to inspire me (and it might not be the book, it might be someone else's review) to make me write something.
:D

I wrote lots of reviews when I first joined but that was just too time consuming. Now I tend to write reviews only for the really good and the really bad; I have RL friends on this site who may need to be warned ;p Also, if I win a book or have been given an ARC by the author I'll review it because that's just polite, but otherwise I don't post that many reviews anymore.

If I ever actually did win one of the books here, or received an ARC, I'd write a review for it as that's just common courtesy. But everything else, I just can't seem to be bothered. Mostly for the reasons I've already said, but like GN, I'm also a lazy insert. :P

I'm mostly writing reviews for myself -- I want to be able to go back to a book I've read and not just see a star rating, but be able to read about what I was thinking as I finished the book. There have been so many times I've tried to remember exactly what it was I did or did not like about a book and just can't recall. The 'review' encapsulates those thoughts for Future Cindy.

There's also an aspect of reciprocity with my GR friends. I love reading their reviews, so I try to contribute to their feeds when I have specific thoughts to share.

Huh. I had never thought of using a review that way, Cindy. That's a pretty compelling reason.

Do you do it for all the books you read, or just the really great/bad ones?

I'm pretty hit-or-miss, so I'd say lately I've been writing reviews for 50-75%? I don't think it has to do with how great or bad the book was, but if it inspired me to write something - a thought or reaction or joke or if it reminded me of another book. And of course if I happen to have the time. :)

Sometimes it's just a line or two.

I pretty much review every thing I've read, have even begun to do so for sites beyond goodreads. I enjoy writing the reviews and hope that my perspective can be helpful to someone else who might choose the same book.

I wrote reviews for pretty much every book I read. Even if I don't have a lot to say, I usually come up with a few thoughts or opinions about the book.

The reason I do this is partially for myself, similar to what Cindy said - it can be a good reminder as to what I thought or felt when I read it - but also for others.

I noticed that, if I'm uncertain about a book, I start browsing the reviews. Star ratings alone don't mean anything. I want to know what someone liked or didn't like about a book, to try and get an idea of whether or not it's something I might be interested in reading. And since I decided that only reviews were really helpful, I decided it would be hypocritical of me to rely on other's reviews and not leave any myself.

So I make it a point to review everything now. I only do so on here, though, 'cause the people on amazon are mean. ;)

I don't leave reviews myself, and have to admit I don't read them, either. As you know, people's opinions are all over the place. One person can say it's the best thing they've ever read, and provide examples of why they think so, while one will say they couldn't even force their way to the end, and provide examples of why that happened. I generally rely on the people around me, who know my tastes and can therefore tell me why they think I'll like the book or won't, and reading a couple of pages of the book itself.

I do not believe in the concept of being competent or not to review the book. In my opinion, the only qualification you need is having read the book.

I write reviews for most of the books I read. Since I'm rarely reading a book at the same time as someone I know, there's no other way for me to express how I feel about a book except for writing the review.

Moira wrote: "I do not believe in the concept of being competent or not to review the book. In my opinion, the only qualification you need is having read the book."

That was probably a poor word choice for me. What I meant was that I'm not as competent at reviewing a book as, say, someone who actually does so for a living(i.e. critics). Not that I'm(or anyone else here) is incompetent and shouldn't write a review(though, honestly, I am rather incompetent).

Just thought I'd clarify...

Ala wrote: "That was probably a poor word choice... I meant that I'm not as competent at reviewing a book as someone who actually does so for a living(i.e. critics). Not that I'm(or anyone else here) is incompetent and shouldn't write a review(though, honestly, I am rather incompetent)."

Yeah...that's how I feel when people start talking character development and plot construction. Sounds more like a building site and I'm the klutz without the hardhat.:P

I don't understand. I talk about character development, plot, pace, setting, and anything else that strikes me while I'm reading. What's wrong with that?

My reviews are pretty informal. I hate reviews that are plot summaries, and I don't generally read the book report ones. I just generally talk about what I liked. If I connected with the characters or not. If I thought it was boring, or well-paced, etc.

As to how reviews can help since it's either "I loved it" or not, I have found that if people talk about what they loved or didn't like, it can help me get a feel for a book.

For instance, some people write, about GRRM's books "I love the grittiness and the realism and the fact that anyone can die at any moment." Now, I'm kind of a HEA kinda gal, so I know that that's not a book I'm interested in.

Whereas, for a different book, say Tithe, I've seen some negative reviews say "There was too much cussing and drug use." Well, I cuss like a sailor and drug use doesn't both me, in context, so I know that what turned that person off wouldn't turn me off.

But if the first review just rated it 5 stars, and the second review just rated that book 2 stars, then I wouldn't really know how to categorize those star ratings.

I completely dismiss star ratings without reviews.

C wrote: "I don't understand. I talk about character development, plot, pace, setting, and anything else that strikes me while I'm reading. What's wrong with that?"

Sorry C, I meant that I can't...I wouldn't know what to say :). I enjoy it when others can articulate, but I can't return the favour.

C wrote: "I don't understand. I talk about character development, plot, pace, setting, and anything else that strikes me while I'm reading. What's wrong with that?"

Nothing wrong with that. It's just that some of us couldn't write a review that way if you gave us a blueprint and 3 years to finish.

Oh, I guess I was just wondering if I'm doing it right. I suppose sometimes that kind of review can start sounding like a literature class lecture.

Personally, I write in my reviews what I look for when I read others' reviews. So I'm sure that, no matter how you write a review, there's always somebody who wants to read it. :)

I don't write many reviews (relative to the number of books I read), but I've started writing more. Writing is not one of my strong points, and I can't always get the thoughts/feelings in my head into words, but I've been trying to improve that.

I like to look at reviews (especially my goodreads friends, since their opinions typically line up with mine) and I figure while I get practice writing, maybe someone will benefit from my opinion.

I usually only write reviews for books that made a big impact on me. (Example: I've read 52 books this year and reviewed 11.) One reason for this is that I am not a concise writer, and if I wrote an involved review for everything I read, I'd never have time to actually read.

The exception to this loose rule is when I read something for a group read or challenge in which members are encouraged to write a review to give other members a taste or opinion. Then even if I don't write a full review, I'll write a couple of paragraphs, but the tone will be somewhat general.

I probably review 60% of the books I read. . . and whether I review a book mostly has to do with whether I feel I have something to say about it. I am most likely to review books I love, because I want other people to read them and so I try to encapsulate the feeling they give me in a review so that other people who want books that give them that feeling know to check out the one I just read. (Gah, that was a roundabout sentence!) A similar motivation is that I will definitely try to review books that I feel are unknown but worthwhile reads -- for instance, even though I was sure there were people better qualified to review his work, I made sure to review the Samuel Delaney collection I read recently, because I think he's brilliant and more SF/F people should read him.

As for my strategy while reviewing. . . again, it comes back to trying to sum up the overall feel of a book -- what its sort of central experience is. Sometimes that means I break down plot choices or character development, but more often it means I'm looking at the book in a larger context -- how it fits within all the other SF/F I read, whether it's pushing boundaries, or a particularly well-done version of a common subgenre, etc.

And I HATE reviews that simply summarize the book, so I never bother with that. ;)

I didn't write reviews at all when I first came on Goodreads, mostly because I'm not really a good writer. But I started because 1. If you write reviews for books, you're more likely to get chosen for ARC's. Seriously, it's in the little rules & conditions sorta sidebar. :) and 2. I figured if I'm a bad writer, there's really only one way to fix that, by writing, and improving.

i try to review each book i read, at least since i've been on GR. an ongoing project is to review every book i've ever actually read throughout my life....fortunately, as a list-loving psychopath, i've actually kept a list of books i've read, since junior high or so. although sometimes its hard to find the inspiration, particularly with the dozens upon dozens of agatha christies, scifi/fantasy serials, comics, porn, and film guides that i've spent time with. maybe i'll skip all of those and just review the ones that have been meaningful to me or have stayed with me for some reason or another.

I try to leave a couple of lines at least for every book I finish. Mostly for the same reason Cindy gave, I sometimes forget what I liked or didn't like, and I use GR as a reading journal. For lesser known works I like to leave a slightly more in depth review (if I liked it) just so other people might be lured into reading it.

Like Cindy, I partly write reviews to remind myself about the book.

I review most of the books I read. I try for a least a paragraph. I like to give someone who has perhaps never read a certain author an idea of why the books is so good--or so bad.

I write a review for every book I read now. If it helps others, that's great. It's more of a way for me to analyze my feelings about the books I read. I don't think star ratings really do it sufficiently for me. It's important for me to know why a book is liked or disliked, or what was liked about it. People have different tastes, so a 1 star book to one person might be a five star book to another person.

I agree it is up to the individual whether you write a review or not, you should not feel that they are mandatory. I also agree that some members may have an academic background in literature and/or journalistic training, which is likely to create a more insightful and better-crafted review. The reason I write reviews is to give others some feedback as to how the book affected me and for example if there was some quality about the book that others might like. My background is a joint honours degree in philosophy and psychology, so novels with psychological and philosophical themes tend to press my buttons, whilst a novel that might be described as a “whodunit “with none of those themes discernable to me would tend to bore me, as guessing simply “whodunit” is of no interest to me, as is any pop psychology used as a motive

I never used to write reviews, because they always end up sounding the same. "I liked this book. It was a good book. Read this book." lol... I'm just not very good at expressing why I like books, and so I was always uncomfortable putting it out there. Then one day I just decided to not worry about what other people think, and start doing reviews just for me. Now I review about 90% of the books I read. I'm not saying they are good reviews... But it's something!

Hi,
I'll come at this from a different direction, from the authors point of view. I wish readers would write a review, every time they read one of my books, not out of vanity, although a gentle massaging of the old ego never hurts!. All I ask is for what they write to be their honest opinion, and the reason they did or didn't like it. It also helps to know why they picked it up in the first place.
Without this information how can independant authors ever improve or reach out to those who would enjoy their work, if they knew about it.
Most of the really good reads out there at the moment are indies, the best of them kick most of the stuff put out by the mainstream into the weeds, yet you never hear a word about them in the general media closed shop.
How many of you have heard of, nevermind read 'Clan' by David Elliot?, I challenge you, as readers to find a better book in it's genre. The sad thing is there are loads more equally as good which never get the recognition they deserve. I'll grant you there is a load of rubbish out there in the indie world, but no higher a proportion than in the mainstream.
Happy hunting for your 'ideal' book, and please, please keep those reviews coming, then we [authors] can move more to fulfilling your needs as readers.
All the best Paul Rix [oldgeezer]

I had never really looked at it from an Authors perspective. Thanks, Tim(Paul?), that gives me something to think about.

Any other authors out there care to comment?

I love to write reviews of books I've enjoyed, simply for the pleasure of sharing that enjoyment with others. At the same time, there are so many great books I never would have known about if it hadn't been for somebody's recommendation.

With rare exception, however, I will not write a negative review. I think it's unfair to the author's efforts, and also to readers who might otherwise enjoy the book.

Having said that, I do take a perverse pleasure in reading the negative reviews of others. I like stories that are edgy, that push boundaries, and that challenge the definition of 'normal'. Often what prompts a strong negative reaction from another reader is precisely what attracts me to the work.

Ala wrote: "I had never really looked at it from an Authors perspective. Thanks, Tim(Paul?), that gives me something to think about.

Any other authors out there care to comment?"

Ala - I'll bite.

I don't review, per se.

If I hate a book, simply: it was not written for ME. It may be somebody else's delight, and I would rather they think for themselves, without the prejudice of my opinion.

More, given my choice of career, I might see far more into a work than just the story - I will notice the technical aspects. And for a reader, many times, that extra bit is irrelevant. The best story can overcome flaws in delivery, and it's not my job, here, to be a critic. Many hugely popular books have borrowed ideas or premises from older books - and for those who just pick them up, brand new, and see those concepts as fresh - why should they care if that story was told by a predecessor? We all tend to fall in love with our first excursion into the world of imaginative literature. So let each reader fall into the bliss with their rose colored glasses intact.

A story has value, period, just for the fact it was told.

I've become seasoned enough by now to realize: there are more aspects to a tale than just action, or characters, or the themes. Stories build suspense on many things, and what's important changes, through life.

The most original books of all can be hardest, sometimes, to grasp - the truly NEW is never comfortable most - that plunge outside the comfort zone can be shattering, and strange, and not pleasant. The most hated books, occasionally, are brilliant.

For this reason, I do find value in marking which books I LOVED. I star rate those with enthusiasm. Why? This is not, as may be cynically inferred, currying favor with peers - rather, it's showing clearly which titles delighted MY taste - the reads so indicated include childhood and teenage favorites - books I look back on with wonder, even if, now, they may play differently. And books that stunned me on all levels, from a more mature stance.

I don't believe in silence, when I was wowed by a work, or inspired, or just plain awed.

One day, I might manage the time to go through the list of my unmarked books(which is not my library, only what's been added recently, or added at whim, because I remembered it fondly)...and comment, "If you liked this, you may also enjoy that and that title," as a help to readers seeking to connect to other works.

If I was commenting for myself alone, I would, definitely, make my comments page private.

I won't give a false rating. That goes against my ethics. I don't blurb for a book I disliked.

As a pro, working honestly in a tough business, I respect other efforts, other editors, other approaches far too much to poison the well. I participate as a reader, with one difference - I reject pack behavior, knee-jerk opinions, and cliques, and at every turn, I'd rather encourage than tear down, particularly since, finding the right book at the right time, at the right moment in life, and in the right mood and mindset, has everything to do with appreciation.

Originality is the spice of life, and by setting my focus on what I enjoyed, I allow others the free range of choice. Look at a title because I loved it, but don't take my disappointments into account. I'd rather experience a work for myself, and form my own opinion.

I'd have missed some incredible treasures if I had not revisited quite a few authors I once read, (and hated first round out, or earlier in my life/earlier in their careers), and I'd have missed some stunningly incredible works, THAT MAKE WAVES - truly had impact - if I looked at what everybody else thought.

If I have any peeve (with reviewers in general) it's rating a book/or commenting on a work that the reader did not bother to finish. Mark it honestly as 'abandoned midstream' -- but a rating, unfinished, is prejudice. There is a way to disable the star rating system here, for a title - but it's not straight forward, unfortunately.

I can name dozens of works I hated at the outset, but that utterly blew me away by the finish - that sort of book changed my thinking, opened gateways to new ideas, and even, shifted my reading preferences, forever. If I don't finish a work for whatever reason (no, I'm not a perfectionist taskmaster) I walk away and say nothing. Those books won't even be on my list.

One last perspective - a word of caution to young, aspirant writers: watch what you say. If you pan a book, if you write in a review 'so and so's book badly needed an edit!' trust me, the editor of that title may well notice...they'll remember the name, if a manuscript of yours hits their desk, down the line - don't expect they'll be eager to work with you later. If you write scathing remarks (in angst, or in ignorance) about 'the industry' remember, words posted in public places will carry impact. Make sure you're prepared to field the consequences.

I've tried to apply this wise measure to a word, said or unsaid on forums: Is it kind? If, not then, is it true? And if not kind, if true, IS IT NECESSARY?

I love writing reviews and reading other peoples reviews. It helps me choose witch book to read next and hopefully I will help someone too. It's a great way of venting my feelings for a book, be it horrible or great. Since non of my friends is really into reading it's great to get it out there. It's part of why I joined Goodreads.

I don't love writing reviews (I actually agonize and procrastinate writing them) and rating is never satisfactory (I would prefer to break down the overall rating to several subratings for various things like characters, plot, story, theme, style, etc.)

When I first started writing reviews, I wrote a topic to describe what the stars in my ratings mean to me so there would be no confusion (or less confusion): http://www.goodreads.com/story/show/2...

My favorite aspect of GoodReads is reviews (both writing them and reading them). Before I joined GoodReads, my reading had dwindled to maybe a half dozen books a year because I could never find the next great read. After joining GoodReads, I've now got three to five years worth of books in my house waiting for me to read them and I read (with the exception of this month) eight to ten books per month - a direct result of recommendations and reviews of my GoodReads friends and followers (or the people I follow).

Thanks everyone for your input so far, it's been great to see everyones take on Reviews. It's really got me rethinking my whole "why bother?" attitude towards writing them.

Hi,
thanks for all the comments, from my point of view, I don't really mine negative comments as long as they have a point. If it is simply a matter of 'not my kind of book' then fair enough.
'Dave' who is spasmodically active on G.R said the thing he didn't like about 'The Day the Ravens Died' was all the British slang, 'Jobs worth' pillock, numpty, and the likes, fair enough, the follow up is tilted more towards the potential American market so I'll bear his points in mind.
This is how we learn, for Daves benefit, I'm not taking out all the British slang, just some of it!
All the best Paul Rix [oldgeezer]

I have been writing something about every book I read for the last fifteen or so years. I have lists of what I've read, sometimes just a few sentences sometimes paragraphs. It's on my computer on my word processor and it's easy to cut and paste it and put it here, often with a lot of editing, and sometimes other places, especially for not well known books. I read so much and I have a swiss cheese brain, so I need to keep the list for my own sanity.
(I read a novel last year or earlier this year and felt it was so predictable. Well, yeah, I'd read it six months before!)
When I'm writing a "real" review, it's got something about the plot, the setting, the characters, whatever sings to me and why it sings or doesn't, and a quote from the book.
And yeah, I enjoy what others write about books I've read, or even will never read...
But I do understand where you're coming from Janny.

I don't necessarily 'enjoy' writing reviews, but I like to incase anybody finds it at all useful to know what I thought about a book I have read. I'm a blogger, so I suppose it comes naturally to me to review something I have or haven't enjoyed. I find it to be a nice way to have your say about a book, because it is very difficult to discuss a novel with somebody else until you've both finished it (most of the people I discuss books with are much faster readers than I am, we're usually at different points in the book), and so I say what I would say to a friend (without spoilers, mind) in my reviews. I guess the main reason I write reviews, is because I find reviews from other people useful.

When I'm looking into buying a book, I'll check the blurb, and the average rating, if it sounds good and the rating is no lower than 3 stars average, I'll check a few of the reviews below, and if there is a lot of negativity, it might even put me off buying the book (though I would if there was even 1 person who reviewed and liked it).

I like to watch what people on my friends list are reading, to see if what they are reading might interest me, and of course reviews are a large part of that. If there is no review, I'll just have to judge a book by its cover.

Whether we write ours or we don't, it seems other people's opinions of the books we might choose to read carry more weight than factors such as marketing, cover etc. This has been a great discussion topic to focus on what we want to say/not say, and how we do that (write/star only/write and star), about the books we read (and write). Thanks for starting the thread, Ala, and to everyone else's thoughtful contributions. I've learned heaps and really enjoyed the discussion so far.

Janny wrote: "There is a way to disable the star rating system here, for a title - but it's not straight forward, unfortunately....."

i sure would love to know how to do that. i get a twinge of guilt when i've given one star to a book i haven't finished. i sometimes mention how i didn't finish it in the review and even put the unfinished book on my 'unfinished' bookshelf. but it would be great to not even rate it without having to mark it as 'to read'.

I don't write formal reviews, but will write a blurb for a book I really like, esp if it is something I want to re-read. I do it so I remember what it was about and why I liked it. If it helps someone else, great!

Mark wrote: "Janny wrote: "There is a way to disable the star rating system here, for a title - but it's not straight forward, unfortunately....."

i sure would love to know how to do that. i get a twinge of ..."

Mark, the idea of a 'left unfinished' tag is a good one. To comment on a book without giving it a star rating, there is tiny gray type next to the star area that says - 'clear' - click that, it erases the default setting of one star.

As a relatively new (but alas, not young) author, I'd love some GoodReads reviews. The ones I've gotten on Amazon and Barnes and Noble for Homecoming, though mostly 5 star, have already alerted me to one problem--hard to keep track of the characters at first--that I hope to fix in the sequel with a preface and character list. (Both are currently on my website.)

I review every book I read. It's partly for myself and partly for others. I find that thoughtful reviews, even the negative ones, help me decide whether or not I want to read a book; so I try to write the kind of review I would find helpful.

Janny wrote: "Mark wrote: "Janny wrote: "There is a way to disable the star rating system here, for a title - but it's not straight forward, unfortunately..."

thank you!

I write reader reviews because paying for a book entitles me to give my opinion of it. I don't think you need to be a professional english major or critic or something.

As a writer it's the reviews of actual readers that mean most to me and, frankly, that i get the least of. we don't write for the critics. we write for the people who buy our books.

so, go buy some of mine and write AMAZON and GOODREADS reviews of them. I prefer them to be positive but, if you honestly hate one or more of them, feel free to let me know.

Little late to the thread...

I personally don't write reviews unless it is a Firstreads Giveaway. I will then since it only seems fair.

I'm personally not much of a writer. Don't like it, not very good at it, rather spend my time doing things I do like.

I don't need reviews for myself. I never forget how a book made me feel and think. I might forget fine details here and there, but none of that belongs in a review anyway. :)

I also don't read reviews for various reasons.

Few people seem to grasp the differences between a book report and a review.

Spoilers. I admit I'm very anal about the whole spoiler thing, and the type of info people put in their book report 'reviews' are pretty much spoiler central for me. I don't want a plot synopses. I don't want to know what happens. To be honest, I don't really want to know much of anything about the book except for the basics, just enough to know if it is something I think I might like. Some of the most enjoyable reading experiences I have had were from books I knew absolutely nothing about before I started.

I know this sounds amazingly antisocial, but I really don't care what other people really think about the books I'm interested in :) I find my tastes tend to vary from the norm and what I like or dislike will not be what others like and dislike, and all I ever seem to end up with are a bunch of misleading expectations. Some of the books I disliked the most came very highly recommended and reviewed.

I do pay attention to the average star ratings. It gives me a basic idea of how something has been received without any details.

I have tried to review everything I've read since joining Goodreads. I do this partially for me so I can look back later and recall what I liked about it--I have a terrible memory--but I also do it because if I'm on the fence about a book or I wonder why a "classic" doesn't have an excellent star rating, I scan through the reviews. I think the reviews are really helpful sometimes and, as a community member, I try to contribute.

That being said, I find the most helpful reviews to the ones that make their points quickly. I almost never read a full review unless it's short. Therefore, I try to do the same thing.

My biggest struggle is with spoilers. I don't want to censor my reviews with a spoiler warning, but damn is it hard sometimes to come up with something to write without giving away plot points. Those are the situations where I end up with a bland, over simplified review that probably helps no one, but oh well.

@kate: You know, I looked through some of those books you listed, and read some of the reviews of what people disliked about those books, and that actually interested me in some of them... go figure. :P

@Mike: Bland and oversimplified is probably what I'd end up writing, which I suppose is part of why I don't do it yet

Kate wrote: "I've avoided these books so far becau..."

i think you should keep avoiding American Psycho! ugh.

however i really liked The Wasp Factory. disturbing but at times rather endearing. banks is an amazing writer and always offers intriguing perspectives.