Everyone's a Critic

One-star reviews of the classics have been the subject of many blog posts, and one example you might want to look at, if you 'd like to share a laugh, is a column in Lit Reactor at http://litreactor.com/columns/the-top....

Of course, the classics such as The Great Gatsby and Ulysses are still very much assured of their good standing in spite of these one-star reviews and rant-like comments. But it's certainly difficult for emerging writers to swallow some of the low ratings and vituperative review comments directed at their works. (I recently came across an example where a reader had assigned a one-star rating to a book with no explanation. It was a newly-released book so this was the only rating it had received. What was so wrong with the book, I wondered, that it deserved such a fate? Hopefully, someone with a little more foresight has since written a helpful review of the book.)

There's a lot at stake when someone puts his or her work out there in an act of blind faith, hoping to connect with readers. (After all, few contemporary authors--unless they're delusional-- actually expect to get rich by writing.) And placing the onus on authors to grow a thicker skin doesn't really address the issue of the lack of accountability when every reader is a potential critic.

A couple of years ago, I came across the following guideline from an avid reviewer (http://booksandpals.blogspot.ca/p/gui...) that I think is very perceptive:

...A good review will give a reader an idea of whether they’ll like a book or not. How well the reviewer liked the book is secondary. Many 1-star reviews describe a book that sounds perfect to someone else.


What a positive and refreshing approach!

(Reprinted from a 2015 post.)