SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

Al wrote: "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."

This is very true. Even short of the big internet blowups and firestorms that have happened recently, it can even be something as simple as getting attention to the review which illicits more 'like' votes, which brings even more attention to the review. Heh.

Colleen wrote: "This is very true. Even short of the big internet blowups and firestorms that have happened recently, it can even be something as simple as getting attention to the review which illicits more 'like' votes, which brings even more attention to the review. Heh."

A phenomenon best known as the Streisand Effect.

Experiment BL626 wrote: "A phenomenon best known as the Streisand Effect. "

Ha! This is awesome.

The second paragraph is particularly apropos:

"Similar attempts have been made, for example, in cease-and-desist letters, to suppress numbers, files and websites. Instead of being suppressed, the information receives extensive publicity and media extensions such as videos and spoof songs, often being widely mirrored across the Internet or distributed on file-sharing networks."

*egrin*

Colleen wrote: "Experiment BL626 wrote: "A phenomenon best known as the Streisand Effect. "

Ha! This is awesome.

The second paragraph is particularly apropos:

"Similar attempts have been made, for example, i..."

I love this article. Perfect.

Bwahaha! How furious she must be.

Armand wrote: "Hi folks- I was prompted to ask about this based on another thread (about "GoodReads Bullying"). What do you do when you read a book, and you just don't like it but you also want to approach the re..."

If I dislike a book, I will express my feeling by the rating I give it. My usual practice is to only review books I enjoy. However, there was one book I disliked so much that I did give it a negative review. However, I pointed out what I thought was both the novel's strengths and weaknesses. I don't really like to bash something just to vent because that is not constructive.

Sorta off topic:

When did consumer reviews suddenly need to become "constructive?"

I see this word pop up all the time now and I don't understand.

There is "constructive criticism" in which a trained specialist critiques a work. It can also come from an editor or a beta reader (someone who's job it is to fine-comb).

But since when does a consumer review need to be "constructive?"

I couldn't agree with you more Mrs J. Authors and publishers keep pushing the "constructive criticism" message, but I'm a CUSTOMER, I don't tell LG that their ball bearings are causing a problem, I just review the washing machine by saying that it is noisy and broke down after 4 months - its up to them to figure out why their washing machine doesn't work. By the way - do authors or publishers pay to be on the site?

Mrs. J, thank you. I was thinking the same thing. I review like I'm addressing a friend. I write to potential readers. And for my own enjoyment. Not for the author. I'll never go completely nasty and attack the author personally. But some people seem to think attacking the book is attacking the author. It's not.

At uni we were looking at communication. One thing that struck me was how when someone's ideas or values are attacked they instinctively try to defend and therefore strengthen them. I'm against attacking in a review of any kind. I think there's a level of required respect but that said I do think it's fine to point out the flaws in a book or to rate it how you feel it deserved. Its the personal choice of the reviewer whether they like to find a positive in a book or only convey the negative elements. Personally even when I attack a book I write one positive or indicate why I can see the value in it but that's more to do with my optimistic, people-person type of personality rather than any obligation. I think obligation ends with reading the book: you don't have to write a review same as you don't have to pass on any word about a movie you see, a clothing brand you like, music you like or even a new type of food you tried. Many of us naturally like to pass on that information in some way but we are not required to and we are not required to say good or bad things. It comes down to the person passing information on.

Along these lines (comments on negative reviews) I just had an interesting comment on a negative review I did.

The comment was:
Thank you. At least I believe this review unlike so many others.

The reason I gave it a negative review was personal, I specified that reason. I stated that other than the ending, I liked the book and that it would be a good read for someone who didn't have issues with that kind of ending. My 2 star rating was based on the fact that while I would give the first 3/4 of the book at least a 4-star rating, the last 1/4 was a 1 star/ won't look for more by this author but only because of the ending.

I personally appreciate this kind of review because it helps me sift through the many books that sound like something I'd like to read. I simply don't find that 5-star raves or the 1-star hate everything about it reviews useful.

Traci wrote: "Mrs. J, thank you. I was thinking the same thing. I review like I'm addressing a friend. I write to potential readers. And for my own enjoyment. Not for the author. I'll never go completely nasty a..."

Exactly. :>

***

As a random side note, I now start humming "when you wish upon a star" to myself whenever I enter this thread...

Colleen wrote: "Traci wrote: "Mrs. J, thank you. I was thinking the same thing. I review like I'm addressing a friend. I write to potential readers. And for my own enjoyment. Not for the author. I'll never go comp..."

lol

Personally, when I read negative reviews (which is all the time) I look for certian words or phrases that I know are my sore spots.

If the MC (male or female) is called whiny multiple times; rape; torture; the death of multiple MCs, alpholes(men who are supposed to be alphas but are assholes instead), etc.

I know my own triggers so I look for them. I mean, no disrespect but no one knows my taste like me. I can never understand the anguish and anger (like that stupid site) over bad reviews. Individuals are individuals...we are not the Borg. What works for one may not work for another.

Traci wrote: "I review like I'm addressing a friend. I write to potential readers. And for my own enjoyment. Not for the author. "

aaaand that's it, right there in a nutshell. reviews aren't criticism for the author's benefit, there's no obligation of any sort (constructive or otherwise) between myself and any other party, it's simply my opinion on my experiences with any given product. if my friends are drawn to or warned off of a book i've read because they noticed their own hot buttons/trigger words (MrsJ, i do that same thing myself), well, that was the point for me. i appreciate hugely that goodreads is not, generally, all 4chan'd up with kindergarden-style verbal poo-flinging, but if i would rather be struck blind than ever read some book again, my review is going to reflect that.

Michelle wrote: "Traci wrote: "I review like I'm addressing a friend. I write to potential readers. And for my own enjoyment. Not for the author. "

aaaand that's it, right there in a nutshell. reviews aren't crit..."

I love that review. Those are the exact things I look for in reviews.

One of my friends reviewed the book - 3 stars - but she didn't mention the triggers that you mention (though she said it was bleak).

And, as I have said, the author and the book derive no benefit from any review, positive or negative. So carry on! Pay no attention to the author at all.

I'm a bit late to the party but I only just came across this thread and while I haven't read all the comments did read most of them and found parts of this discussion really interesting.

I'm all for freedom of expression but I'm generally not a fan of book-bashing or author-bashing which I've come across far too often on GR. I've seen so many reviews that attack authors personally and lay into characters and plot lines in an unjustly harsh manner. We're all allowed our own opinions but I don't think that hateful reviews add any value so I'm not a fan. I don't think long reviews basically saying “this is the best book ever” over and over again are very useful either. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for enthusiasm, but I'm more interested in why you loved the book so much than I am in how amazing you thought it was.

That said, I think some very popular books have potentially dangerous take-home messages about abusive relationships and other serious issues that do need to be addressed. Destructive co-dependent relationships can be romanticised in novels and some readers might not realise that the good outcome in their favourite book is the exception rather than the rule. Negative reviews are a great way to make readers aware of the implications of some of the books they've read and loved that they might not have realised.

To answer the original questions in this thread, I've seldom thought about the author when writing a review, GR friend or not. The only negative reviews I've written were for The Name of the Wind and the sequel but I don't think my reviews were nasty or mean-spirited. I re-reviewed both books a few times as I couldn't stop thinking about them but kept the previous reviews below my updates. I'd like to think that ratings and popularity don't affect my views, but in this case I think they did. If the series wasn't so beloved by the GR community I might not have been so frustrated by the issues I had with these books. Very few books are perfect and I can usually overlook the small imperfections or give them a line in a review to point out the small things that bothered me. I often feel like I must have missed something when I don't like a book that everyone else raves about and that can add to my dislike. Writing this comment has made me realise how much of my frustration over The Name of the Wind came from my unreasonably high expectations of the book due to it's popularity. I'll have to try to avoid letting that happen in the future.

MrsJoseph wrote: "Sorta off topic:

When did consumer reviews suddenly need to become "constructive?"

I see this word pop up all the time now and I don't understand.

There is "constructive criticism" in which a ..."

The whole point of reviewing a book is so that other people who are interested in said book can get an idea of what it's like. I will often read reviews to get an idea of why I might like or dislike it. If someone says "I hated it" that doesn't tell me anything as a potential reader, but if they instead say, "The prose was dry and I couldn't relate to the characters because they were unrealistic" that gives me a better idea of what to expect.

Why do you write a review? Generally I write a review when I feel very strongly about a product whether that be positive or negative. Are my reviews always great? No. Do I try and offer something worth reading for those interested in said product? Yes.

Ha! Derrick--I hate the spoiler tags too, but I do use them for major plot/surprise points to people that read my reviews won't completely hate me. I think when I'm reading a mystery, it's reasonable to assume there's going to be a death or two--mentioning that isn't a spoiler. Mentioning who might be.

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'm not interested in simply bashing a book I don't enjoy. So, if I was friends with the author or not, I would try to keep my criticisms to a constructive level - not just say, this book was terrible, I hated it, but try to explain what it was that didn't really "click" for me about the book.
Also, I genuinely think that almost every book has something positive - a weak story can be well written, for example.

2. Do you leave really long reviews for the books you hate, or really short ones.
My reviews vary in length, and for me, it's not so much to do with how much I enjoyed/didn't enjoy a book - there are books I really like, but have written relatively short reviews of. I think sometimes I just like a book, and it's all very simple - I enjoyed reading it, it made me happy to read it etc. But I do try to include at least a couple of specifics, positive or negative, otherwise it's not worth reviewing it at all!

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?
Not really. I think it's like anything... a song gets to number one in the charts, so obviously a lot of people liked it enough to buy it, but I can't stand it! I don't feel I'm missing out, I just think "oh well, it's just not my thing". It's not something I dwell on.

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)
I don't remember feeling that way about a book, but I have felt that way about other things, like films and tv shows, so I certainly understand where you're coming from :-p
I think with books, and this doesn't really make a lot of sense, but if something's popular I either feel like I can't say I love it (a suppressed inner-hipster perhaps? hehe) because people will be like "oh, another one jumping on the bandwagon"... or I go the other way, I feel a bit worried about criticising it, in case I get bombarded with hate from fans. Maybe I'm just insecure!

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... as I said, I don't like to write a review that's just "didn't like it, the end". If I have nothing constructive to say, I'd rather just not write a review.

What a fascinating thread! I stopped by because I did "a read for an honest review" (my first and possibly last) last week, and was actually worrying about my review. I deliberately didn't look at anyone else's reviews until after I'd finished the book. Nearly all of them were favourable, (4-5 stars) with only a couple looking like mine...2 stars.

I felt really awful writing the review, but an honest review was asked for, so that's what I posted. And the interesting thing was that I quite enjoyed the writer's concepts, was initially interested in the main character and the plot line, but was then put off by the writing style. And by writing style, I mean alternating chapters, in the first person, from two characters' points of view. Just not my cup of tea, really. Nearly everyone else was raving about the book, but not me. (There were a few other issues for me as well, but that was the main one.)

After I read the other reviews and realised that the author routinely "likes" good reviews but not ones under 4-5 stars I felt really awful.

Interestingly, like a couple of other posters here, I usually ignore 1 and 5 star reviews when I'm looking at a purchasing a new book, as I find that the 2-4 star reviews provide me with a much better idea of whether I'll actually enjoy the book. Along with the cover blurb of course!

As a new author myself, I've been waiting for reviews of my own work with some trepidation, and (although this might sound a bit weird) am sort of hoping to see a (written) review with less than five stars - because I'm always a bit suspicious of books with a solid five star rating! I'm sure I'll die a little inside if I get a really bad one, but really, not everyone likes the same thing. It would be a boring world if we did. :)

I agree that this is a really interesting thread and that the world would be a very boring place if we all agreed all the time :)

I've only recently (since I became mod of the group) been asked to read some books for review by authors and I'm actually really scared to do it! Although I think I'm a fair reviewer and I generally understand why I don't like certain books even when they're good, I'm really not keen to read a book and give a bad review when I'm one of only a handful of people who've reviewed said book. It's because of this that I've put off reading any of the books I've been asked to review. Does anyone have any advice?

Leonie wrote: "What a fascinating thread! I stopped by because I did "a read for an honest review" (my first and possibly last) last week, and was actually worrying about my review. I deliberately didn't look a..."

I had the same experience just recently. I received a book through the ARR thingy and while all reviews were positive, mine wasn't. The author even dismissed it on her twitter saying I wasn't her target audience because I had rated Dune with 2 stars but as someone who almost exclusively reads Scifi, I don't know who could be a better target audience for a scifi novel.

The novel was translated from another language to English so I could only base my review on the English version I have read. Unfortunately, the translation wasn't good. I didn't feel awful writing a negative review. I generally don't. I am being honest and I am trying to be polite. Sometimes a book can leave me really, really frustrated which often results in a more "passionate" review....you know, curse words, etc. though I'm trying to avoid those.

I also don't care if a book is popular or not. I read whatever. Sure, I do ask myself sometimes why my opinion is so different than everyone elses (i liked it, they hated it, and vice versa, I think Dune is a good example there) but in general I just think that people like different things.

There are books though that I cannot take seriously, will never take seriously, and that I will bash every chance I get (FSOG and Twilight) - because those books are simply wrong, deliver wrong messages to people (women in particular - sorry, raging feminist here!), and simply should not have been made to begin with.

@Penny: I would simply read and review them. If they are good, give them a good review, if you didn't like them, review them as to the why.

I honestly think that most people want to avoid conflict and therefore have a really hard time writing negative reviews. But I must admit that I'm doing it lie Mrs.J here, when I get attacked, I block people and move on.

It is important if the translation is bad, for the reviewer to say so. Most of us aren't bilingual; if the author or publisher paid for a translation and it was lousy they really want to know that. And of course readers want to know too -- it is no service to anyone (except possibly the incompetent translator) to be coy.

I say again: write your review the way you want. Remember, nobody's paying you for this. What are they going to do, dock your salary? You are doing it for les beaux yeux, for your own pleasure. If it is stressful, annoying, or oppressive, for heaven's sake, stop and do something you enjoy. Life is too short.

Kathryn wrote: "MrsJoseph wrote: "Sorta off topic:

When did consumer reviews suddenly need to become "constructive?"

I see this word pop up all the time now and I don't understand.

There is "constructive crit..."

The whole point of reviewing a book is so that other people who are interested in said book can get an idea of what it's like. I will often read reviews to get an idea of why I might like or dislike it. If someone says "I hated it" that doesn't tell me anything as a potential reader, but if they instead say, "The prose was dry and I couldn't relate to the characters because they were unrealistic" that gives me a better idea of what to expect.

Why do you write a review? Generally I write a review when I feel very strongly about a product whether that be positive or negative. Are my reviews always great? No. Do I try and offer something worth reading for those interested in said product? Yes.

constructive
 
con·struc·tive
[kuh n-struhk-tiv] adjective
1. constructing or tending to construct; helping to improve; promoting further development or advancement ( opposed to destructive ): constructive criticism.
2. of, pertaining to, or of the nature of construction; structural.
3. deduced by inference or interpretation; inferential: constructive permission.
4. Law. denoting an act or condition not directly expressed but inferred from other acts or conditions.

I write reviews mostly for myself and then for my friends. I have no problem stating what I liked or didn't like (or hated) about a book...

For myself.

But I am not a beta reader nor am I a writing assistant. I am not writing any review in order to give assistance to the writer with his/her craft. That should happen before I ever see the book.

So my reviews are never constructive because I am not in the business of beta reading and I'm not an editor.


So I really have a problem with the word "constructive" when related to reviews.

"I write reviews mostly for myself and then for my friends. I have no problem stating what I liked or didn't like (or hated) about a book..."

Then that would still be constructive (if not to the writer, it would be to other readers). The "use constructive criticism" is, I think, generally aimed at people that know nothing better to write than "this book sucks", "don't bother with this piece of...", etc.

Thernymous wrote: ""I write reviews mostly for myself and then for my friends. I have no problem stating what I liked or didn't like (or hated) about a book..."

Then that would still be constructive (if not to the w..."

That's not constructive though, it's opinion.

But what I have seen is that when people use the word "constructive" they want the review to be more helpful for the author, not the reader.

But even as it relates to the reader...how can I be constructive? I can be informative but I can't be constructive. I can tell you what I liked or no...but that's opinion. While I do have the educational background to be (somewhat) constructive...how would any reader/author know that? And is it a good idea to get your constructive crit from an untrained layperson? Only beta reader(s), crit partners and copy editors should be in the field of being constructive, IMO.

While I agree that the book should be finely polished the first time, a writer is always looking to improve their work. Hence "editions".

Reviews like "This book sucks" doesn't help anyone, writer or potential readers. When I'm looking for a new book my main focus is to see if the story has strong characters, and you can see if it does or doesn't from the reviews people leave.

Everyone looks for different things when looking for a book. That's why when I write a review I try and include every aspect of the book I can think of: plot, character, prose, POV, etc. And whether or not the ending felt conclusive (there's nothing worse than getting all the way through a book and feeling unsatisfied at the end).

You don't have to be a editor or well read to tell if any aspect of these things are lacking in development.

A.E. wrote: "While I agree that the book should be finely polished the first time, a writer is always looking to improve their work. Hence "editions".

Reviews like "This book sucks" doesn't help anyone, write..."

But that's not "constructive." It's an informed opinion.

And the reviews like "this book sucks" are probably not really for other readers and are notes left for the reviewer only.

Carol wrote: "Ha! Derrick--I hate the spoiler tags too, but I do use them for major plot/surprise points to people that read my reviews won't completely hate me. I think when I'm reading a mystery, it's reasonable to assume there's going to be a death or two--mentioning that isn't a spoiler. Mentioning who might be."

I'm with you on the spoiler tags. It's so annoying to click each of them to read the review in its entirety. On the Goodreads app, all it takes is one click and you can see the spoilers in the review AND in the comments.

Re: Constructive Criticism:

Don't want to get into a semantic argument, but I will say I mostly see authors who say that they prefer constructive criticism, and that, coupled with general usage, does make me think constructive criticism tends to be more for the author.

For me I would say it often is a matter of degree. For instance, a general opinion could be "I found the plot slow and plodding, especially in the middle", whereas it could be more constructive to be more specific, such as "The part when X went to Y could definitely use some editing".

Both of these could be useful to readers and authors... but I've encountered some authors, wanting constructive criticism, wasn't more details from me than I would give in a normal review. (Instead of just saying "there are a lot of typos", the author wanted specific examples - which I was not about to do, since I'm not a freaking beta-reader or a copy-editor.)

ALL THAT SAID -

I also tend to take umbrage to the term. Partially because I also don't write reviews for authors but more, I think, because it often becomes an issue of tone.

For instance, I just googled 'constructive criticism', and these are some of the things I found:

"Being critical is easy, and offering criticism seems easier still. Yet constructive criticism - - the more refined and effective brand of critical feedback - - is like an art when compared to nagging, nit-picking and negativity."

"Constructive criticism is the process of offering valid and well-reasoned opinions about the work of others, usually involving both positive and negative comments, in a friendly manner rather than an oppositional one."

Be friendly. Be pleasant. Don't be oppositional. Don't be negative.

And the reason most given for requesting constructive criticism instead of "being negative", is because the feelings of the author may be hurt.

And that's where the notion of "I'm writing for other readers, and not the author" comes most into play, for me.

I don't write my review with the thought of sparing the author's feelings, 'cause I'm not writing for the author. And, sometimes, if I hated a book and think it was a steaming pile of dogshit, I'm gonna say so.

Yes, I try to make my reviews helpful to other readers by telling them what I didn't like - which could, arguably, also help the author - but I'm not going to necessarily watch my tone in giving my opinion, and am prone to get a bit ranty.

I'm fucking tired of the tone arguments in relationship to reviews, and how my review should be "constructive" instead of negative or mean.

Re: Spoilers

I, somehow, manage to write reviews without dropping huge spoilers and, most of the time, without needing spoiler tags. So, no, I will not just deal with spoilers.

I try to avoid spoilers in my reviews. I even hate it when the blurb of the book gives away to much of the book. So my reviews are just short impressions of my thoughts on the book, not a complete analysis of plot, writing style, themes etc...

Just something along the lines of: I liked this book. It felt like this and this. There were some things that bothered me tough. some examples (trying to do it without spoilers) but all in all this is a good solid book that you should read. 3 stars

A good mean review can be much more fun than a vanilla lukewarm assessment. A prime recent example, hysterically funny (a restaurant): http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/14/din...

It seems like a fine line we all walk, doesn't it? I would assume that any author would be interested in a variety of things like pacing, repetition, strengths and weaknesses of the plot, or moments of implausibility.

We all have our loves and hates - I'm not a huge fan of the current fad for present tense/first person, for example - but if in my review, I'm honest that this was an issue for me, then hopefully it becomes useful for other readers with the same prejudice.

I really liked the statement that Colleen made: "I'm writing for other readers, and not the author."

Peter wrote: "Just something along the lines of: I liked this book. It felt like this and this. There were some things that bothered me tough. some examples (trying to do it without spoilers) but all in all this is a good solid book that you should read. 3 stars"

Very hard to do. I got trolled once simply because I said the book was not about X but about Y, that the blurb was misleading.

Canary wrote: "Way I see it, if you don't have anything nice to say, at least have the decency to be witty. :)"

:D

Peter wrote: "I try to avoid spoilers in my reviews. I even hate it when the blurb of the book gives away to much of the book. So my reviews are just short impressions of my thoughts on the book, not a complete ..."

I do try to avoid spoilers - but if I do spoil I usually mark them. I have done a full on angry rant before...spoilers included. But I started the review with "Spoilers ahead, you shouldn't read this."

Canary wrote: "Way I see it, if you don't have anything nice to say, at least have the decency to be witty. :)"

I so agree! Being boring is the worse sin.

MrsJoseph wrote: "I so agree! Being boring is the worse sin."

How I feel about books, too.

I can forgive a lot - but if I'm bored, you're toast. ;)

Brenda wrote: "A good mean review can be much more fun than a vanilla lukewarm assessment. A prime recent example, hysterically funny (a restaurant): http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/14/din......"

I saw that and LMAO. Caused quite the ruckus in the foodie world.

I prefer writing, and receiving, honest reviews based on the reviewer actually reading the book. Several reviews on my books start out with: "I normally don't read romance..." continuing on to claim they were pleasantly surprised by various aspects of the book.
When I give a critique on a dog I've judged, I look for something pleasant to say, then mention what I see that I don't prefer, and if possibly finish with something positive, so it's a "sandwich" of comments.
Too often reviewers see "witty" as an excuse to be nasty. Not the same at all IMO

I believe the constructive criticism issue is in the eye of the beholder.

Example: I recently received my one and only 1 star review on Amazon for the first in my series of books. When I regained consciousness ;), I picked myself off the floor and read the review.

The review: "Terrible Typeface." "This may or may not be a good book, i don't know. What i do know is that the typeface of the kindle edition is unreadable enough for me not to bother reading past the first five pages - it's published in a terrible font that doesn't obey any of my device's font settings."

This reviewer was not trying to be constructive. He was pissed. The product as he saw it was faulty. I was also pissed. This guy's Kindle sucks and I get a black mark. Aargh!

However, I hadn't looked at my 1st book on Kindle in quite some time. Hmmmmm. I went to the Cloud reader and pulled up a new version. Sure enough, my font had somehow switched to a glitchy version of Courier. No clue how or why. No clue how long. Was I losing sales and churning out refunds due to a faulty font?

I went from anger to gratefulness. Thank goodness for the review process. Without it I might never have known about the issue. Granted, my sales have been cut in half since the 1 star has been sitting atop my review board, but I'm confident the incident will be better for me in the long haul.

My point: The reviewer shouldn't be required to be constructive, but even the most skewed reviews can be used by an author in a constructive way. Just be open to what might be there.

You could add a comment that you fixed the font?? Asumming you are able to.

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 always try to be as impartial as possible and offer solutions (if I have them) for the problems I came across. I tend to refrain from just pointing out what's wrong and moving on, but in the case I don't have an answer myself I'll leave it anyway. Just because I don't have the answer doesn't mean the author doesn't either, and it always helps to know that something was wrong for a reader.

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

My reviews are generally on the long side, I like to put down everything I felt about the book, good or bad. I'll either have a lot to say about everything I loved about the book, or what I didn't like so that people reading my reviews will have a good idea whether they'll like the book or not before buying it.

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?

Not really, a lot of the time it comes down to personal taste. I can appreciate something for what it is in terms of quality even if I don't personally like it. I wouldn't ever classify something as bad just because it's not my genre. That'd be defying the purpose of a rating system in the first place, since I could just 1 star all biographies because I don't like biographies, no matter how well written they are.

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)

I generally steer away from really popular books, I find that too much hype leads to disappointment more often than not. It's hard to be objetive when you know the book is supposed to be the reinvention of the wheel and I don't think I'm able to be as fair as I otherwise would have been if the book weren't so popular.
When I do read such a book, I still try to block out all that hype and read it as I would read any other book.

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?

Not unless there was an actual reason for it. Say if I completely forgot about a redeeming feature or wasn't fair when dealing with a certain aspect.
I generally don't change my score for the book, as I know how much I enjoyed the book and that's hard to get wrong, but I tend to edit my review when I notice I missed something out.

I wouldn't ever change a score/review for pitying the author. No one benefits from bad writing, much less the author. If he did make a mistake he should be the first one to know so that it can be corrected and isn't repeated in the following book.
No one makes a mistake on purpose, and letting the author know about it is one of the various uses a review has, otherwise we'd just rank books by stars without any mention to the reason for a low score.

There's a multitude of reasons for a good or bad score, that's why I always write reviews for all the books I read, I feel it's important that people do it so other people can know what to expect from the book and also so the author knows what worked and what didn't.

What a fascinating discussion. I agree with those who say they only write reviews of books they like. So do I, mostly. If I dislike a book, I often don't even finish it, and then I don't write a review. The notable exception is the writer I like producing a bad book. It feels like a betrayal - so I would write a bad review to express my frustration. As to reviews being 'constructive' - MrsJ is right, it's nonsensical. Reviews are for readers, to let them know what to expect. And for myself, to express my feelings.

Daniel wrote: "I believe the constructive criticism issue is in the eye of the beholder.

Example: I recently received my one and only 1 star review on Amazon for the first in my series of books. When I regained ..."


I'm so happy you found out about the glitch!

But, I have to say...that review was not constructive. It was informative. You did not know that Amazon had corrupted your files. As soon as you found out that it occurred, you fixed it. The review did not teach you anything in order to better your craft or your book. The review didn't teach you how to format a better file. No scenes were fixed or language tweaked.

A review can (and should) be informative for the reader.

A review cannot and should not be constructive. The constructive period is when you are honing your craft and editing your work. To think that a review should be constructive makes me shudder and die a little inside. Honestly, to expect a paying customer to teach [the author] how to write is quite horrifying.

And, I will repeat, by the time the reader reads the book, it is TOO LATE. Years, possibly decades, may have passed since that work was written; in fact the majority of works reviewed on Goodreads have authors who are deceased. Elvis has left the theater!

When you write a review anywhere, do not worry about the author at all, for good or for ill. Consider the work as an artifact that fell onto your bookshelf from the sky. Review it the way you would review a rose, or a thunderstorm, or a camel (an animal once reviewed as a horse assembled by a committee).

I don't write reviews for other people. I write them so I remember in the future if i want to read them again so politeness doesnt play into it for me