Rachael Eyre's Blog - Posts Tagged "reviews"
Reviews
A subject that's undoubtedly close to every reader and writer's heart: reviews!
As part of my Year 7 English homework, I had to keep a Reading Diary. Being then- as now- both a reader and incurable geek, I took to the assignment with gusto. While I loved conventional reviews, I also liked experimenting with other formats (I vaguely remember covering the Fawlty Towers scripts as a Hotels From Hell broadcast). It fostered a love of book and film reviews that has remained with me.
So today I'll look at both sides of the coin- what are reviews like for both a reader and writer?
Reviews for a reader
Reading a book is a big investment. You're talking about ten or so hours of your leisure time; surely you want to separate trash from treasure? And what better way to tell than check out its reviews?
There are 3 main types of review- those by papers and/or celebrities (generally these have the highest credibility), those by readers you can respect, and those from readers you can't. Go on any review site and the distinction becomes obvious.
There are certain celebrities I trust: Stephen Fry, Sarah Waters and Mark Kermode. While I can't say our opinions always coincide, I admire their work and value their judgement. The only drawback is that if somebody becomes a recognised authority, eg Waters on lesbian books, their name automatically gets splashed on anything with the slightest connection, whether it has their endorsement or not. You soon learn to tell the difference.
When it comes to unknown readers, it boils down to the review itself. Do they drop enormous great spoilers? Is it well thought out? If they didn't like it, do they make a proper argument as opposed to, "It was crap" or "I had to study this for school" (real comments I have seen on boards, alas!) You might also be able to glean their preferences from other books they've reviewed- at the risk of making a sweeping generalisation, somebody who loves horror might not appreciate your sweet teen romance.
Don't be too hasty to judge spelling or punctuation mistakes. Perhaps they're dyslexic, or did the review on their Smartphone, or they simply had a bad day. It's only when this is combined with a sloppy, poorly considered review that you can say, 'I disregard this person's opinion'. Some people criticise readers who give star ratings rather than write reviews, but they may have their own reasons for doing that.
When it comes to writing a review, tread carefully. There are far too many reviewers who try to be clever rather than have anything meaningful to say. Be honest but don't be brutal. If you really feel that strongly against a book, should you review it?
Earlier this year I read a book I found absolutely revolting; it seemed nothing less than an apologia for paedophilia. It caused such a hangover, I didn't read another book for a fortnight- probably a record for me. But I didn't want to make it controversial, and therefore irresistible to other people, so I left it alone.
If you must mention events in the book, mark them as spoilers. Try not to compare it unfavourably to other books, even when it seems like an outright rip off. If the book left you feeling underwhelmed or you didn't finish it, there's probably little point in writing a review. Stars will suffice for such occasions.
Reviews for a writer
Hoo, boy. In order to be a writer, you have to have an industrial strength hide. You've given birth to this lovely book and sent it out into the world- but not everybody's going to like it. And some readers may well voice this.
All readers have a concept of "the perfect book" in their heads. Nobody knows if this fabled creature actually exists; it's probably just an amalgam of all the things they've read and liked. Your heroine's pluckier, the love interest's less romantically tortured etc. They bring this preconception to your book- and woe betide if it falls short in some way.
Authors are notoriously sensitive. If a good review appears, they're in seventh heaven for a week. When they get a bad one, they lament their fate, declare they're never going to write again etc. But is this always their fault?
In some instances it's as simple as a clash between the reader expectation and the author. Take my first book, The Governess. I put it in the Lesbian category of Amazon; writing the blurb, I channelled the style of old lesbian pulps, which couldn't actually use the words "gay" or "lesbian" and hid behind codewords such as "unconventional" or "obsession" instead. I thought that would be enough, but to this day I get shocked reviewers saying they didn't realise this was a gay story, or one about obsession (when it's described as an 'erotic thriller'!) Since it tends to be these readers who give me two and one star reviews, it's hard not to draw certain conclusions. I can only assume they were sidetracked by the description of erotica, thinking it'd be a sexed up version of Jane Eyre.
Receiving hostile reviews makes you feel guilty about similar reviews you've written in the past. After a run of particularly bad reviews, I vowed I would never write a 'nasty' review again, instead falling back on the star system. Until you write yourself, you tend to regard authors as factories churning out a book a year- you don't consider they could be reading your scathing review, and possibly losing sleep over them.
As part of my Year 7 English homework, I had to keep a Reading Diary. Being then- as now- both a reader and incurable geek, I took to the assignment with gusto. While I loved conventional reviews, I also liked experimenting with other formats (I vaguely remember covering the Fawlty Towers scripts as a Hotels From Hell broadcast). It fostered a love of book and film reviews that has remained with me.
So today I'll look at both sides of the coin- what are reviews like for both a reader and writer?
Reviews for a reader
Reading a book is a big investment. You're talking about ten or so hours of your leisure time; surely you want to separate trash from treasure? And what better way to tell than check out its reviews?
There are 3 main types of review- those by papers and/or celebrities (generally these have the highest credibility), those by readers you can respect, and those from readers you can't. Go on any review site and the distinction becomes obvious.
There are certain celebrities I trust: Stephen Fry, Sarah Waters and Mark Kermode. While I can't say our opinions always coincide, I admire their work and value their judgement. The only drawback is that if somebody becomes a recognised authority, eg Waters on lesbian books, their name automatically gets splashed on anything with the slightest connection, whether it has their endorsement or not. You soon learn to tell the difference.
When it comes to unknown readers, it boils down to the review itself. Do they drop enormous great spoilers? Is it well thought out? If they didn't like it, do they make a proper argument as opposed to, "It was crap" or "I had to study this for school" (real comments I have seen on boards, alas!) You might also be able to glean their preferences from other books they've reviewed- at the risk of making a sweeping generalisation, somebody who loves horror might not appreciate your sweet teen romance.
Don't be too hasty to judge spelling or punctuation mistakes. Perhaps they're dyslexic, or did the review on their Smartphone, or they simply had a bad day. It's only when this is combined with a sloppy, poorly considered review that you can say, 'I disregard this person's opinion'. Some people criticise readers who give star ratings rather than write reviews, but they may have their own reasons for doing that.
When it comes to writing a review, tread carefully. There are far too many reviewers who try to be clever rather than have anything meaningful to say. Be honest but don't be brutal. If you really feel that strongly against a book, should you review it?
Earlier this year I read a book I found absolutely revolting; it seemed nothing less than an apologia for paedophilia. It caused such a hangover, I didn't read another book for a fortnight- probably a record for me. But I didn't want to make it controversial, and therefore irresistible to other people, so I left it alone.
If you must mention events in the book, mark them as spoilers. Try not to compare it unfavourably to other books, even when it seems like an outright rip off. If the book left you feeling underwhelmed or you didn't finish it, there's probably little point in writing a review. Stars will suffice for such occasions.
Reviews for a writer
Hoo, boy. In order to be a writer, you have to have an industrial strength hide. You've given birth to this lovely book and sent it out into the world- but not everybody's going to like it. And some readers may well voice this.
All readers have a concept of "the perfect book" in their heads. Nobody knows if this fabled creature actually exists; it's probably just an amalgam of all the things they've read and liked. Your heroine's pluckier, the love interest's less romantically tortured etc. They bring this preconception to your book- and woe betide if it falls short in some way.
Authors are notoriously sensitive. If a good review appears, they're in seventh heaven for a week. When they get a bad one, they lament their fate, declare they're never going to write again etc. But is this always their fault?
In some instances it's as simple as a clash between the reader expectation and the author. Take my first book, The Governess. I put it in the Lesbian category of Amazon; writing the blurb, I channelled the style of old lesbian pulps, which couldn't actually use the words "gay" or "lesbian" and hid behind codewords such as "unconventional" or "obsession" instead. I thought that would be enough, but to this day I get shocked reviewers saying they didn't realise this was a gay story, or one about obsession (when it's described as an 'erotic thriller'!) Since it tends to be these readers who give me two and one star reviews, it's hard not to draw certain conclusions. I can only assume they were sidetracked by the description of erotica, thinking it'd be a sexed up version of Jane Eyre.
Receiving hostile reviews makes you feel guilty about similar reviews you've written in the past. After a run of particularly bad reviews, I vowed I would never write a 'nasty' review again, instead falling back on the star system. Until you write yourself, you tend to regard authors as factories churning out a book a year- you don't consider they could be reading your scathing review, and possibly losing sleep over them.
