group discussion
topic:
Responsible Book Reviewing
date
newest »
newest »
This link came to me from Book Browse and brings up the question of how much info a reviewer should reveal in his/her reviews. Some reviewers practically reveal the whole plot and this just doesn't seem fair to me.
http://www.holtuncensored.com/hu/
I review every book that I finish, but I take great pride in the fact that my reviews *never* contain spoilers. Why would I ruin the reading experience for anyone else? It's just not good reader etiquette.
Spoilers are bad form and the issue of this post, but Alice Hoffman's first responses, which I've read, didn't mention the spoilers; they only mentioned that this critic was a "moron" and gave out her personal information so that she could be harassed. Spoilers should never be included in a review, but I'd have more respect for Hoffman if she'd started with her discomfort over that factor and remained silent on all others.
The good reviews are nice but not reliable. The worst book ever written will have good reviews. If I am looking at reviews I pay more attention to the negative reviews. I have not enjoyed Hoffman's last two books. I think she has gotten too famous for editors to contain. Karen
I get her point-and it's valid-and I realize how personal it must be to have something creative critiqued (a reason why formal education is so important to the creative process where peer critiquing is a matter of course), however Hoffman's behavior is worse and turns me off of the book quite frankly.
I do agree that reviews from the public do have a significant effect on my reading/purchasing decisions. I like the "spoilers" checkbox that Goodreads has also.
