SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

Byron wrote: "Experiment, Your second point is well taken, though I still feel like you shouldn't post something online if you don't want some people reading it. As far as the first point, seems like everyone is..."

Thin-skinned, perhaps. But I feel it's really more like some authors have incredibly bad business sense. Seriously, arguing with your customers? What business class or book did those author learn from? O_o

lol

Theater reviews in newspapers (and newspaper sites) are written by professional reviewers. On blogs and stuff it's Katie bar the door. In theory a professional reviewer is going to be more experienced, professional and intelligent about it (I write book reviews myself in my day job, and comic reviews for a blog) but in actuality there are plenty of crappy pro reviews in all the arts, and you can find fan reviews and analysis that go into far more depth than any newspaper could devote space to.

Experiment BL626 wrote: "Thin-skinned, perhaps. But I feel it's really more like some authors have incredibly bad business sense. Seriously, arguing with your customers? What business class or book did those author learn from? O_o"

QFT. We can't change what people like or dislike so it's best to just move on.

Brenda wrote: "Theater reviews in newspapers (and newspaper sites) are written by professional reviewers. On blogs and stuff it's Katie bar the door. In theory a professional reviewer is going to be more experienced, professional and intelligent about it (I write book reviews myself in my day job, and comic reviews for a blog) but in actuality there are plenty of crappy pro reviews in all the arts, and you can find fan reviews and analysis that go into far more depth than any newspaper could devote space to. "

I have to say that you are correct.

I always want to die laughing when people demand that reviewers who aren't "professional" act "professional." Normally, this demand is accompanied by a demand for a more professional and/or academic review.

*gasp* The LOLz

Have they ever seen an academic review? No .GIFs or profanity is used...but SNARK comes in abundance. Let alone the fact that an academic review will suddenly turn your hetro married mother of two into a raving nympho with an Electra Complex.


Plus...unless you're in that specific field a lot of it can go over your head...and it's boring to boot.

The truest and best reviews come from people who love the work and really dig down into it. An example, here's a rabbi discussing Batman:
http://blogs.yu.edu/news/2012/07/31/h...
Notice that this essay is both really about Batman, and totally informed by the writer's life and expertise. It is not, for instance, a review that could have been written by somebody who isn't Jewish. A really really good review has a great deal of the writer in it.

I almost never write reviews, and this is primarily why; I hate being critical.

1. What if you want to give a negative review but also want to encourage the author (because- say- they are your Goodreads friend)?

I probably just wouldn't write it. If I did, I'd make sure to also point out things I liked. Compliments are good for confidence, and confidence is necessary for improvement.

2. Do you leave really long reviews for the books you hate, or really short ones.

My inclination would be to pick it apart almost word by word. But that gets tiring so ultimately I'd end up just writing something short. That said, if I really hated the book, chances are I wouldn't even finish it anyway, and I wouldn't write a review on something I didn't finish.

3. Do you ever feel like you missed something when everyone else gives a book 4 or 5 stars and you just have no interest in it?

Nope. Though I do get somewhat annoyed when books I absolutely love get two or three stars. I feel like THOSE people missed something.

4. Do you ever have the urge to bash a book only because it's popular? (I get that urge sometimes, usually I resist, but I feel it).

Nope. I'll bash popular books, but not "because" they're popular. Rather, I'll express frustration that such bad books become popular.

5. have you ever written a negative review and then immediately felt bad about it and gone back and changed it? And- as related question- have you ever given a book a break (and an extra star) because you feel bad for the author?

Yep, and this goes back to why I don't really write reviews anymore. Even when I'm just rating books 1-5, I stick mostly to 3's and 4's; 3 if I didn't like it, 4 if I liked it, and 5 if I really loved it. I just feel bad giving a book a 2.

(I also note what the average score is, and if, for instance, it's like a 4.0, I'll even feel a little guilty giving it a 3, because I feel like I'm dragging down the average, even though my score doesn't even make a dent.)

The other thing to keep in mind is, that people like different things. That's why there is more than one dish on a menu, and more than one flavor of coffee at Starbucks. It is okay that we do not agree about a given book. It means that there is something for everybody. The point of a review is to explain why it worked, or didn't work, for YOU. (Newspapers pay reviwers in hope that they speak for more people than just themselves, but this does not always come off.) So your individual review does have value.

An interesting aspect of negative reviews came up in that Feedback thread, one that I hadn't really considered fully before.

The social aspect.

Sure, there are those who genuinely don't care what people think of them or their opinions but, there are others - perhaps due to insecurity, or maybe just the social parts of our beings - who can feel isolated or lonely, maybe even a bit depressed and left out, over something as simple as a book that everyone seems to love that you don't (or vice versa - but since more people seem willing to be positive about a book than negative, I think it's that aspect which we see most often.)

By rating something you didn't like negatively, and, perhaps, reviewing it to list your reasons, you could be helping someone else out there feel not so alone in their views... and it can be such a comforting thing to know that someone out there thinks or feels the same way you do about something.

Also, speaking of the average ratings, can they even be remotely trusted if there are so many people who never want to rate anything low? How can I possibly trust a 4.4 star rating when I know that there are people out there who probably didn't like it but won't rate it lowly, for whatever reasons?

(Mind you, I don't pay much mind to average ratings anyway - but there are, obviously, those who do.)

And, again, there's that social and psychological aspect. You see a book rated 4.4 stars, so you think you must be missing something for not enjoying it like so many other people, and how damaging can that be to some people?

I don't mean this post to be as melodramatic as it sounds to me as I'm writing it - but it was an interesting side of things that was brought up and I thought I'd share it.

Colleen wrote: "An interesting aspect of negative reviews came up in that Feedback thread, one that I hadn't really considered fully before.

The social aspect.

Sure, there are those who genuinely don't care wh..."

Great points, Colleen.

Especially the feeling left out or that you're missing something part.

I remember when everyone was reading The Name of the Wind. Gosh. I really couldn't get into it. I didn't get the point of it all and either I was bored or I was crying. No middle ground. Then I saw this review: http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...


:-D

Happiness is a negative review.

Thanks for sharing, MrsJ - I just liked it. Partially for the review itself, as it was interesting and amusing and because I'm one of the few who was pretty meh about NotW - and partially for his having to deal with the typical fall-out of fans of the book with the usual hit-list.

It's kind of funny/sad how there's almost a script that gets followed with these things.

"How can you review a book you haven't finished?"

"Easy - I just reviewed the bit I did finish."

"But your conclusions are wrong!"

"Oh? Please do cite specifics of where things I mentioned in my review are wrong?"

"No! I'm just going to imply that you're being mean to me even though I started it!"

"Ok, then... "


Or the "Well, you must've liked it, actually, since it made such a strong impression on you!"

(I can't even begin to understand that one.)

:-D


Or what about "I can't beleive you wrote such a long review on a book you hated!"

And the infamous "I'm just saying youre review suckx, lol :)"

Yes - because, apparently, there is a standard of allowable length for a negative review. I have, it seems, never been sent the rule book, though.

And, honestly, sometimes I don't realize how long my posts or reviews are until I'm finished them. Especially if I get into rant mode, my fingers sort of just run away with me. ;)

Exactly!

Colleen and MrsJoseph, I think y'all might like this article:

If you don’t like it… Then don’t read it!: Debunking the BS.

Remember, you only have 24 hours every day. Life is too short, to read books you don't like.

Brenda wrote: "Remember, you only have 24 hours every day. Life is too short, to read books you don't like."

Tell that to my school.

I'd say life is too short to read a book I hate. But not one I just don't like. If I only finished books that are only getting a three star rating or above, my dnf list would be bigger than my read list.

Experiment BL626 wrote: "Colleen and MrsJoseph, I think y'all might like this article:If you don’t like it… Then don’t read it!: Debunking the BS."

Thanks for sharing. :>

I'm not generally a fan of posts with a huge dose of pics like that - but I'll make an exception this time. ;)

Brenda wrote: "Remember, you only have 24 hours every day. Life is too short, to read books you don't like."

??!!

How am I to know I don't like it until I read it?

I mean, I usually give a book 75-100 pages unless it's just pure drivel...and that one gets my DNF review.

You know what my mother would say to that statement: "Try it, you might like it."

I used to force myself to finish a book even if I was hating it. I've gotten better - but I'm still inclined to struggle through a book than to give up. It has to be truly awful to get me to abandon it. (I am better in that at least I don't feel like I have to continue series, though I still have some niggling doubt when I don't.)

But for books that I'm not necessarily enjoying, but not hating, either - those I tend to finish. After all, how many times do people say "it gets better"? And sometimes it does... and there's that part of me that just has to know. *shrugs*

SO I just saw some screen shots in the Feedback thread.

That racist book is now being championed by STGRB site. They are already trying to game the system by flagging all the 1 star reviews.

*sigh*

I think I feel sick.

MrsJoseph wrote: "SO I just saw some screen shots in the Feedback thread.

That racist book is now being championed by STGRB site. They are already trying to game the system by flagging all the 1 star reviews.

..."

The fact that a sudden "flood" of 1-stars suddenly popped up all at once isn't gaming the system either?

1. What if you want to give a negative review but also want to encourage the author (because- say- they are your Goodreads friend)?

You can already see this from some of my reviews of indie authors. I wasn't downright mean or insulting to them. I just pointed out what I liked, what I didn't and what I thought could be done to improve the book or future works. That approach has actually gotten me civilized replies from the authors who actually took the time to read my critiques. In fact, some of them offered to give me free copies of their other books in exchange for my honest opinion.

2. Do you leave really long reviews for the books you hate, or really short ones.

I usually leave short ones, or just 1 stars and then just leave the review space blank. In my earlier days on Goodreads, I did put out some truly scathing reviews of the authors and their writing ability (Left Hand of God comes to mind) but would I go back and change those reviews? No. They were my honest feelings at the time and I've matured in the way I write reviews to be somewhat constructive instead of solely critical.

3. Do you ever feel like you missed something when everyone else gives a book 4 or 5 stars and you just have no interest in it?

No. Everyone has their own opinions. That's what reading is about. Even if a friend of mine and I loved a certain book (say...Mistborn Trilogy by Brandon Sanderson) but ended up disagreeing on another book (Elantris for example), it doesn't mean our individual opinions are any less valid. It just means that not everyone will have the same viewpoint even if their tastes are similar.

4. Do you ever have the urge to bash a book only because it's popular? (I get that urge sometimes, usually I resist, but I feel it)

Not really. I liked certain books when they were relatively unknown and my interest in them have not changed despite them gaining widespread popularity (Sabriel by Garth Nix comes to mind. When the first book came out, almost nobody had heard of it but I was a diehard fan). I do agree that certain popular books are barely worth the paper they're written on, but they're still valid literature and everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

5. have you ever written a negative review and then immediately felt bad about it and gone back and changed it? And- as related question- have you ever given a book a break (and an extra star) because you feel bad for the author?

Errrr....not really. Rating is impulsive and I usually do it immediately after finishing a book when the reading high is strongest. Reviewing however is done after an extended period of time so I can say it comes straight from what I feel about the book and I wouldn't go back and change it.

Lord Nouda wrote: "The fact that a sudden "flood" of 1-stars suddenly popped up all at once isn't gaming the system either?
"

Not in the least.

I see it as consumers reacting to the market and to the product maker's own comments in multiple public venues. I also see that quite a few people have received free review copies of this book and HAVE started to read it. A lot of the 1 star reviews came from people who couldn't get pass the first few pages.

Plus, there are always samples.

Colleen wrote: "An interesting aspect of negative reviews came up in that Feedback thread, one that I hadn't really considered fully before.

The social aspect.

Sure, there are those who genuinely don't care wh..."

Colleen, funny enough I got this comment on one of my negative reviews today:

SNIP

I really needed to say this, and to express my negative opinion because I felt like I'm choking!!! This is the first time that I comment some book and I registered on this site just so I could write this. If I made mistakes in spelling and grammar, please note that English is not my first language. Thank you verry much for listening (actually reading :-)) P.S. I couldn't figure out, but it seems that I can't write a review. I mean, I don't have that option. That's why I'm writing this here.

This poor lady found GR and signed up because she was SO UPSET and had no one to share it with. How horrible she would have felt if the negative reviews for this book (of which there are not many) were hidden.

Yay for the positive power of negativity! :D

As both an author and reader, this has been a fascinating thread to read. On to the original questions...

1. What if you want to give a negative review but also want to encourage the author (because- say- they are your Goodreads friend)?

I wouldn't write a review. I would write them a private letter.

2. Do you leave really long reviews for the books you hate, or really short ones.

Err... see answer to #5.

3. Do you ever feel like you missed something when everyone else gives a book 4 or 5 stars and you just have no interest in it?

No. See answer to next question.

4. Do you ever have the urge to bash a book only because it's popular?

No. Popularity is such an imprecise and historically inaccurate measure of worth, good or bad. I've read plenty of unpopular books that I thought amazing. Conversely, I've read way too many popular books that I thought were the literary equivalent of steamed okra. I tend to only want to bash a book if I feel it has just wasted a couple hours of my life, defiled me, or sucked my soul down into its bottomless black maw of hell.

5. have you ever written a negative review and then immediately felt bad about it and gone back and changed it? And- as related question- have you ever given a book a break (and an extra star) because you feel bad for the author?

No and no. I have a long-standing rule to pretty much only write reviews for books I enjoy. Also, I try to avoid writing reviews of books by authors I know, even if I enjoy the book. If I don't like a book, then I don't write a review. I'll occasionally break that if the book in question belongs to a famous dead author (I'm talking to you, Milan Kundera!). I dunno. Being an author makes me somewhat uneasy about writing negative reviews on books. My family has a bakery and it would definitely not be kosher to go around writing reviews of other bakeries. I kinda see book reviews in the same way. Hmm. I guess that means I can write reviews of defunct bakeries.

I hope there's a method to my madness in there somewhere.

Here's an interesting analysis of the subject:
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/bo...

Nice article. Thanks for sharing. :>

It is disheartening to find that even professional sources like Time's and NPR and whatnot frown on negative reviews and will bury them.

I have long since been suspicious of the various blurbs that are used for promoting books. I've heard too much about the mutual glad-handing club - how authors from a shared publishing house will write positive blurbs for each other's books without even reading them, and the like - and now I know I can't really trust alleged objective sources, either.

I would rely on my friends but, alas, we often differ about such things. Ah well, guess I have to keep finding books the hard way. ;)

Brenda wrote: "Here's an interesting analysis of the subject:
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/bo..."

Thanks for that, Brenda. I enjoyed the article. I also agree. Without critical review(s) literature as a whole will decline. Because everyone has to be so "nice."

When I was in theatre I used to get reamed pretty regularly by our director. He didn't use harsh language because we were much younger than him but he never sugar-coated shit.

I believe that he made me into both a stronger person and a better person. He called me out on my BS with no hesitation and made me think about my actions and my dedication.

And the last time I saw him I thanked him for it. He made a bare black floor with some curtains into my home and I will never forget that.

What is important to keep in mind is the difference between paper and electronic media. There are a limited number of pages in TIME or the NY Times; paper is very expensive and mailing/shipping the pubilcation is not free. Furthermore, they have to make their money from customers. A bored customer is not a paying one. They have to pick and choose what goes into each issue; it is certainly not unreasonable for them to just skip over all those 'meh' reviews of mediocre books, and instead shoot for the raves or the barbecue forks of major works.
Move to an electronic platform, and everything changes. The only limit here is how much typing you're willing to put into a review; if you wanted to write 5000 words about a book nobody is going to stop you and it doesn't cost a cent. If nobody reads it, nothing happens; nobody loses their investment or wishes they'd gone with another fluffy article about how cool Harry Potter is.

Except that a lot of newspaper outlets and things have online outlets, and the impression I got was that the negative reviews aren't being posted in their online blog areas, either.

And it's one thing to not run a meh review of a mediocre book, and another, entirely, to not run negative or scathing reviews because of the culture of nice - which is, again, the impression I got from that article.

Colleen wrote: "Except that a lot of newspaper outlets and things have online outlets, and the impression I got was that the negative reviews aren't being posted in their online blog areas, either.

And it's one t..."

Agreed. Its the same impression I got.

Jaq wrote: "The top reviewers I saw gave a good analysis."

I think this is important for any good review. It's not just a matter of like or dislike, but why the reviewer felt that way because one person's dislike might be enjoyed by another person, so even a poor review might interest a few new readers.

1. What if you want to give a negative review but also want to encourage the author (because- say- they are your Goodreads friend)?

Interesting thread and what astonishes me is the number of readers who bother to finish a book they don’t like. You’ll only very rarely see a negative review among mine, because I won’t finish reading a book I don’t like, hence no review. It's not like I'm reading a particular book as an assignment for school.

With regard to #1, I feel no obligation to encourage or discourage anyone who is not a face-to-face friend. I make the assumption that anything published, whether by legacy or self, is the author’s best product. If they want criticism join a critique group and get help *before* the book is released. There is no excuse for releasing anything that is absolutely not your best work. I once talked to an author at one of my wife’s conferences who said she had sent off a manuscript to a publisher knowing it wasn’t her best effort. I was flummoxed and undiplomatically asked, “why would you ever do something that stupid?”


2. Do you leave really long reviews for the books you hate, or really short ones.

I don’t review books I hate. I prefer to ignore them. Does skew my average rating, but so what? Reading a book you hate smacks of self-abuse (and not the fun kind.)

3. Do you ever feel like you missed something when everyone else gives a book 4 or 5 stars and you just have no interest in it?

So much is a matter of personal taste that I would expect and be disappointed if everyone gave a book unanimous praise. The Quakers used to have a saying, “If everyone agrees with you, you are probably wrong.”


4. Do you ever have the urge to bash a book only because it's popular? (I get that urge sometimes, usually I resist, but I feel it)

No, I prefer to be honest, especially since I write reviews primarily for myself and a small coterie of friends.

5. have you ever written a negative review and then immediately felt bad about it and gone back and changed it? And- as related question- have you ever given a book a break (and an extra star) because you feel bad for the author?

No. See # 1

The length of a review (for me) is purely dictated by how much I have to say. There is a huge freedom in not having a word count to meet.

1. What if you want to give a negative review but they are your Goodreads friend)? & 5. have you ever written a negative review and then immediately felt bad about it and gone back and changed it? And- as related question- have you ever given a book a break (and an extra star) because you feel bad for the author?

I end up posting a truthful review, then deleting it, then raising the rating, then lying awake worrying about it, then lying awake berating myself for worrying about it, then swearing off Goodreads for a week or 2, then lowering the rating to where it should have been. Then answering a message from the upset author, angsting about that, apologizing and removing the rating altogether! BTW this isn't working for me so I don't recommend it.

I wish reviews could be like every other product review (eg my new washing machine sucks it doesn't wash the clothes well ... not constructive not sensitive, just plain customer comment). Oh well.

Fayley wrote: "1. What if you want to give a negative review but they are your Goodreads friend)? & 5. have you ever written a negative review and then immediately felt bad about it and gone back and changed it?..."

:-D

See, this is why it saves so much angst if the author simply never looks at the reviews.

Fayley wrote: "1. What if you want to give a negative review but they are your Goodreads friend)? & 5. have you ever written a negative review and then immediately felt bad about it and gone back and changed it?..."

Doing negative reviews is tough. Most people hate to hurt the feelings of even strangers, let alone friends (either casual Goodreads friends or people who sit next to you in church and are godparents to your kids).

Most people. There are assholes in the world that delight in being negative, but we won't address their problems here -- right?

Always, always, ALWAYS give truthful reviews (even if you're reviewing my books). If an author can't deal with reality, s/he'll never amount to much. You can't fix something if you don't know it's broken. If everyone who reads your lame stuff feeds your ego, you'll never improve to the point you can become a successful author instead of a "wanna be".

That said, confine your review to the work itself. Don't slam the author. Mention the strong points along with the weak ones. "This is an engaging plot that, unfortunately, needs outside editing." That sort of thing. Be specific when possible. The shortcomings can be such things as slow sections, not enough conflict, poorly developed characters, spelling and grammar errors beyond "just a few" (which is normal since even copy editors aren't perfect), whatever it was that bugged you.

And remember: you're not trying to be an editor. You're reading for pleasure (or information) and something got in the way of your "pleasure". Tell us what that was.

Of course, if something pleased you (not a waste of time and money), by all means tell other prospective buyers. I love it when I find a gem that I can trumpet to the world.

So...what do you do when you write a truthful yet negative review, state your reasons and people feel the need to attack you over it?

I'm at the place right now with one crappy little book, being attacked, being called names and generally having people argue with my opinion. WTH is up with that? It's getting increasingly harder to remain polite.

When someone reviews and hates a book I love, I don't act like only my opinion matters, or that they're opinion is wrong and I don't ridicule them. They're entitled to that opinion, it's their experience.

@Jackie - What often boggles my mind isn't the fact that someone might feel/thing your opinion is wrong (because I think we all sometimes have that knee-jerk reaction, no matter how irrational (though, perhaps, I shouldn't speak for others)), or even that they might get a bit defensive about it.

No.

What boggles my mind is the fact that they don't see that there is anything wrong in acting on that.

I mean, polite disagreement is one thing, but to come in and attack someone?

I would never, in a million years, go into someone's review and tell them their opinion was wrong. Whether they loved a book I loathed, or loathed a book I loved - though I do find that, by-and-large, it's when you don't like a book that people loved that they really get all bent out of shape about it.

But to somehow think it's totally ok to go into someone else's review space and be like "no, you're wrong". Just baffling...


ETA: And they almost never seem to grok how it could be applied both ways.

For instance, I was once told in a review in which I called a book's plot fairly straightforward that I was point blank wrong because the plot was complex and I was just misrepresenting the truth.

He couldn't wrap his mind around the notion that I could, were I so inclined, just as easily say he was wrong and/or stupid for thinking the plot complex when it was so clearly not.

Like I said - baffling.

Jackie wrote: "So...what do you do when you write a truthful yet negative review, state your reasons and people feel the need to attack you over it?

I'm at the place right now with one crappy little book, bein..."

I usually curse them out and tell them to locate their own review space. And then I delete their comments and block them.

I don't suffer fools gladly. And I see no reason to troll reviews. A discussion is fine anything else and we're not ok.

Colleen, It's even worse that telling me I'm wrong, it's being called derogatory names for my opinion. That's crossing the line. I feel like I should report this insane behavior. The reason I love goodreads so much is the good manners and respect generally found here, I really would be disappointed if goodreads turns into a facebook mentality where people are compelled to be so 'anti'.

Mrs. J,
I like your method, lol
Honestly, I don't like being mean, though I can get down with the best of 'em. I may just have to take up your suggestion. TY

I am just trying to be honest in my reviews. And if I do say something negative, I try to be specific about it as positively as possible. And I acknowledge sometimes my opnion may be very different than others. But I feel if I tell others what I may have felt was weak or whatever, they can decide whether that amtters to them or not. Or maybe it could give author food for thought in a future book. Or not. But there is never any reason to be mean or cruel when writing a review (and I have seen some of those out there)

@Jackie - You should report it. No one should have to put up with that.

Colleen, thank you for the validation. I'm going to do it right now...

Colleen wrote: "@Jackie - You should report it. No one should have to put up with that."

Agreed.

Done. Thank you lovely ladies. You're just what I needed.

Jackie wrote: "So...what do you do when you write a truthful yet negative review, state your reasons and people feel the need to attack you over it?

I'm at the place right now with one crappy little book, bein..."

Love MrsJoseph's reply.

I usually figure the attackers are friends of the author. It happened to me when I posted a negative review of a book by a Mercenary. His buds (who probably posted "good buddy" reviews) piled on.

What they don't realize is that by creating a firestorm, they made things worse for their friend. A negative review will sit there like a black spot on the wall, but if you call attention to it, everyone starts seeing just the spot and not the wall.

A major example happened about 6 months ago when an author (I won't mention her name) fired back at Big Al (a popular full-time reviewer with his own blog) and made an utter fool out of herself over a less than stellar review he'd posted on his site and Amazon. The controversy caught fire and ended up splattered all over the web, including here at Goodreads (some of you might remember it). She pretty much ruined her sales.

The best thing others can do is ignore your negative review or write a comment thanking you for your time and opinion. Any other reaction becomes self-destructive.

Soooo, don't fret over someone who takes umbridge to your review. Just move on and let them stab themselves to death.