Making Connections discussion

I was wondering what everyone's thoughts were about posting negative reviews. I don't mean vicious or malicious reviews, because obviously those aren't right. But what if you've finished a book and just don't like it? Or worse, if you disliked it so much that you couldn't finish it at all?

My personal stance is to only post reviews that are at least somewhat positive. I don't have to like or agree with everything, but I figure what irritates me might be someone else's cup of tea. I'd hate for my negative opinion to put off a reader entirely.

People should just be honest and direct, and if they promise to review on a blog, should post the review whether good or bad. Honest is honest, malicious is malicious.

(I am an author but not a reviewer)

I don't see a problem with negative reviews being posted. Ultimately it will depend on what the reviewer sees their 'job' as being - do they see themselves as a kind of consumer guide? Or do they do it because they enjoy writing about things they like?

If someone has taken the time to read a book then they are perfectly entitled to post their thoughts about it.

L.H. wrote: "People should just be honest and direct, and if they promise to review on a blog, should post the review whether good or bad. Honest is honest, malicious is malicious."

I agree, a promise is a promise. But if you pick up a book because it looks fun, not because you promised to review it, then what?

Michael, makes sense.

Whenever I look at movie reviews, I always look at a few well-rated reviews and a few badly-rated reviews. Between the two, I get a good feel for whether it's a 'fan boy' movie and/or whether the grizzled reviewer has some valid points.

In the world of selling your novel, it is definitely preferable to have positive reviews, although too much positive and it begins to smell a little fishy.

I post both positive and negative reviews. I'm only a reader and my blog states that reviews are subjective. Just because I like a book doesn't mean others will and the opposite is true, too. Luckily, I haven't had too many negative reviews to post.

Case in point, I'm still a fan of LKH even though her books have gone downhill. Why? Because I'm invested in the characters and the basic story is still good. And I'm an optimist. What can I say?

I love The Dresden Files, but I have friends who hate it.

I love Harlequins and my brother calls them trash.

All reviews are subjective.

I post negative rants reviews if I dislike the book and sometimes I get negative feedback for them but personally I think authors should expect negative reviews because everyone has different taste. If I were an author I wouldn't want people saying they loved my books when actually they hated them. The point of reviews is to be honest not to please the author.

No, I never post negative reviews. What "good" does that do the writer or potential readers? I cannot lose sight of the fact that my opinion is just that - an opinion.

I will post negative reviews, but I would never rate or review a book I couldn't finish. I cringe whenever I see in someone's review 'I couldn't even finish the book.' If you didn't actually read it, you shouldn't be writing about it.

I also try to be helpful in a negative review and tell what it was specifically that I didn't like rather than just saying it sucked. That being said, I very rarely leave less than 3 star reviews because I choose to read books I think I'll enjoy :)

I post negative reviews here, but usually will not post them on my blog if they are 2 or less ♥'s unless the author still wants it posted.

I try to contact any author that I would be giving a "negative" review to and ask if they want it posted. Most still do, and I do also try to say something positive about it, but also point out what I thought was negative. I figure if the author wants to revise their work, the feedback is important; if not, then it might save further negative reviews from happening (since those folks won't read it).

I will post my honest opinion of any book that I have read. Whether it's positive or negative doesn't matter. However, it is written in my review policy that I will not post a review if I do not finish the book and typically, if I don't like a book I don't finish it. In those cases, I contact the person/company who asked for the review and notify them of the situation.

Recently I have been involved in a number of thread discussions about reviews: fake ones, malicious ones, author's responses to them, etc. It's made me really reflect on my own use of reviews. I hadn't really put a lot of thought into it before. But this afternoon I was on Amazon (checking out a free download to see if it would interest me) and read some of the reviews. What I found myself doing surprised me. I completely skipped past the positive reviews and only read the bad ones.

No, I'm not a sadist enjoying someone else's suffering ('cause certainly someone suffered with each one). What I realised was that the general accumulation of positive reviews told me what I needed to know about the book's good points. There were people who liked it. What I wanted to know was whether the bad ones were the type that put me off or not. Were they opinion/preference based or content based? The first sways me very little, the second quite a lot.

My point is that the bad reviews served a distinct purpose, and it wasn't solely derogatory. So, to bring this back to the initial question I think, yes, bad reviews should be put out there. Wether you want to do that on your blog or on external sites like Amazon, Goodreads, etc is up to you.

I do post a polite negative review, but always try to include some positive thoughts, or say, "if you like x genre, then you'll like this." It's just a matter of opinion, after all.

I've read a few books that I just did not like at all, and I made a folder called "Did-not-finish". I myself am and will be very critical if I find the book to be just god awful but if I just didn't care for it or couldn't get into it while I express my distaste I also try to throw a positive comment in to say while its not my thing someone else may enjoy it.
I have not come across a negative review on my book but I also tell and people to be sure they know that my book is poetry(which isn't exactly big to some) and if they are still willing then by all means I have them read it. I also look for Horror fans, if they aren't totally sold then Im not giving them the book to read to review because I do not want a negative review when they knew full well what it was about.

Generally, I make good reviews ONLY for Goodreads authors.

Why??

Because I have not found a book that I find abhorrent. I always believe there is something good in a book. So why focus on the negative, when there is something positive in everything. Besides I really do support GR authors so much.

I don't post negative reviews, as Elryxe said there is something positive in everything.

I actually didn't like a book that is widely read, at least in India: The Monk who sold his Ferrari by Robin Sharma. But in my review I did indicate that while I am not in agreement with everything the author says, there are a few gems in this book. Perhaps others may benefit more from the book, than I did.

Further, I do not review books falling in genres I dislike. This ensures that my review is fair.

It is possible to point out the fallacies in a book, without ripping the author apart.

For instance, in India, when it comes to new authors, for some English is their second language and they are unable to afford good editors. In such cases, in case a book has quite a few typo errors, or grammatical mistakes, I do point this out in a subtle manner. As long as the book is interesting, these errors per se, are not the main focus of my review. I have seen a few reviewers tear a book apart merely because of such errors.

It takes guts to write and I do appreciate the efforts put in my authors.

So far, I haven't come across a book I've strongly disliked. But if I did, I guess I would not review it and let the author privately know why I am unable to review it.

I have posted reviews and just said "just couldn't finish it". I don't ever just rip a book apart, when I have issues with a story i state them in a politically correct manner. Just because I didn't like it, doesn't mean the next person won't. If I really hated a story I will just mark the "stars" rating and not review it at all.

Stacy {whatstacy} wrote: "I have posted reviews and just said "just couldn't finish it". I don't ever just rip a book apart, when I have issues with a story i state them in a politically correct manner. Just because I didn'..."

I've done that once or twice here on GR, and they were both very popular authors. Christine Feehan (sp?) And L.A. Banks. But I couldn't get past even the first chapter in either book. I wouldn't post something like that on my blog though.