How I review and what the ratings mean
Everyone reviews differently and my system is a bit weirder than most. I rate PURELY on entertainment alone. This is why manga and romance novels can get 5s while Shakespeare and that one history book you found super informative can get 1s. I'll usually acknowledge any benefits a book might have, but I won't change my ratings based on them. This has made people angry with me in the past but I'm not going to apologize for feeling the way I feel about the things I read. I either liked it or I didn't.
I like genre fiction. I don't think there's anything shameful about that. Romance novels are fun, which is why I read so many of them, but sometimes nonfiction and classics can be fun, too. (I have a special shelf for fun classics.)
5 stars - I couldn't put it down. Would possibly read again and would definitely recommend to a stranger. I am going to look for more books based on their similarities to this one. It's a game-changer.
4 stars - Not perfect but really enjoyed it. Maybe it was problematic. Maybe it was a guilty pleasure. Fuck off, I still loved it. I would recommend this too, and probably without any sorts of caveat.
3 stars - Flawed read but still a-OK. Some people use 3 stars to rate books that they didn't like but don't want to say so. NOT ME. If I gave your book a 3 I liked it, but probably found it forgettable, slightly awkwardly written, or skimmed some sections of it. A good read that's a bit of a throwaway. It passed the time.
2 stars - Meh. I didn't hate it and the reasons this didn't work out might be more of a "me" thing than a "you" thing. It's possible I didn't finish this, or if I did, I really had to push myself. The writing style was probably incompatible in a major way. I might read more from this author, though. They had potential.
1 star - I hated the book. Maybe it was all kinds of boring. Maybe it made me angry or offended me (by being boring or otherwise). Maybe it was filled with spelling errors or promised to be something it wasn't. Maybe I just was having a really bad day. There's a high chance I didn't finish. Either way, one star.
***More notes:
-I read a lot of vintage romance novels from the 1970s and 1980s because I find them hilarious. A lot of them have problematic content. I will usually try to post content warnings in these reviews and won't typically recommend these to people unless asked since they have so many tropes that don't fit in with what most people are seeking in romance. I also do not condone or endorse the things that happen in these books (it needed to be said).
-I don't read christian fiction (except, on very rare occasions, historical romances). I am not religious and typically, these books have very little to offer me.
-Someone once pointed out to me years ago that I didn't really have any books by people of color on my shelves. They were right-- I didn't-- and I've made a concerted effort to really try to read more diversely since then. I think it's really important for those with voices on this platform to seek out and boost books with characters of color and LGBT+ characters (specifically F/F, which is only just starting to get the love that it should have had all along-- now more ace and bi rep, please).
-I'm a 30-something-year-old who likes comics. I think they're fun.
-My snark is worse than my bite. I might come across as a condescending snob-- and I am-- but it's usually not coming from a place of ill intent. That said, I don't take kindly to rude comments. I get a lot of them, so if I snap at you, it's probably because you were lucky #100 that day. If you have a problem with me, it's probably just better for you to block me.
I like genre fiction. I don't think there's anything shameful about that. Romance novels are fun, which is why I read so many of them, but sometimes nonfiction and classics can be fun, too. (I have a special shelf for fun classics.)
5 stars - I couldn't put it down. Would possibly read again and would definitely recommend to a stranger. I am going to look for more books based on their similarities to this one. It's a game-changer.
4 stars - Not perfect but really enjoyed it. Maybe it was problematic. Maybe it was a guilty pleasure. Fuck off, I still loved it. I would recommend this too, and probably without any sorts of caveat.
3 stars - Flawed read but still a-OK. Some people use 3 stars to rate books that they didn't like but don't want to say so. NOT ME. If I gave your book a 3 I liked it, but probably found it forgettable, slightly awkwardly written, or skimmed some sections of it. A good read that's a bit of a throwaway. It passed the time.
2 stars - Meh. I didn't hate it and the reasons this didn't work out might be more of a "me" thing than a "you" thing. It's possible I didn't finish this, or if I did, I really had to push myself. The writing style was probably incompatible in a major way. I might read more from this author, though. They had potential.
1 star - I hated the book. Maybe it was all kinds of boring. Maybe it made me angry or offended me (by being boring or otherwise). Maybe it was filled with spelling errors or promised to be something it wasn't. Maybe I just was having a really bad day. There's a high chance I didn't finish. Either way, one star.
***More notes:
-I read a lot of vintage romance novels from the 1970s and 1980s because I find them hilarious. A lot of them have problematic content. I will usually try to post content warnings in these reviews and won't typically recommend these to people unless asked since they have so many tropes that don't fit in with what most people are seeking in romance. I also do not condone or endorse the things that happen in these books (it needed to be said).
-I don't read christian fiction (except, on very rare occasions, historical romances). I am not religious and typically, these books have very little to offer me.
-Someone once pointed out to me years ago that I didn't really have any books by people of color on my shelves. They were right-- I didn't-- and I've made a concerted effort to really try to read more diversely since then. I think it's really important for those with voices on this platform to seek out and boost books with characters of color and LGBT+ characters (specifically F/F, which is only just starting to get the love that it should have had all along-- now more ace and bi rep, please).
-I'm a 30-something-year-old who likes comics. I think they're fun.
-My snark is worse than my bite. I might come across as a condescending snob-- and I am-- but it's usually not coming from a place of ill intent. That said, I don't take kindly to rude comments. I get a lot of them, so if I snap at you, it's probably because you were lucky #100 that day. If you have a problem with me, it's probably just better for you to block me.
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
TL *Humaning the Best She Can*
(new)
Jun 04, 2020 05:49AM
Well said Nenia 👏
reply
|
flag
I like this approach, Nenia. Enjoyment is very important to the reader experience, but a lot of people act like enjoyment-based ratings are a crime. I also appreciate how you list the benefits/problems a book has, no matter the enjoyment level. You've inspired me to relook at my rating system and to implement similar rules (I tend to forget what my ratings mean lol). Well said.
Marissa (Laudable Lit) wrote: "I like this approach, Nenia. Enjoyment is very important to the reader experience, but a lot of people act like enjoyment-based ratings are a crime. I also appreciate how you list the benefits/prob..."Thanks! I've actually gotten a little more lenient over time. All my DNFs used to be 1* but since I no longer have time to read everything to the end, sometimes I'll give DNFs a 2* if I feel ike it could have been a 2 or even a 3 if I'd pushed through. :)
I hope you find a system that works perfectly for your needs!
I'm very similar. I use all the stars. I don't divide books into "5" and "terrible." 5 is I loved it, 4 is I liked it, 3 is either consistently meh or liked-it-but-big-flaws, 2 is disliked it, 1 is hated it. The difference between a 3 and a 4 is often technical, but the difference between a 4 and a 5 is more emotional and subjective. Did it make me want to clutch the book to my chest and run off squeeing into the sunset? For DNFs, I'll give a 1 or 2 if I got far enough in to give a useful critique, and no rating at all if I read like 2 pages and fell asleep.
Kelly wrote: "I'm very similar. I use all the stars. I don't divide books into "5" and "terrible." 5 is I loved it, 4 is I liked it, 3 is either consistently meh or liked-it-but-big-flaws, 2 is disliked it, 1 is..."I like your rating system. It makes a lot of sense to me!
Yeah, I think i'm pretty similar in the respect of rating based on enjoyment. I don't really care for the literary merit, or supposed lack thereof, of what I read. I have no problem giving an important classic one star, or a trashy YA book five stars. If I liked it, I liked it. :)
Mirnatius wrote: "Yeah, I think i'm pretty similar in the respect of rating based on enjoyment. I don't really care for the literary merit, or supposed lack thereof, of what I read. I have no problem giving an impor..."Yay!! At the end of the day it's all about how you feel.
Missy wrote: "I fucking love this"Thank you ♥️🙏🤩
I love this. Stick to the rating system that works for you <3
Lea wrote: "I love this. Stick to the rating system that works for you <3"Thank you so much, Lea!
My rating system used to be similar to that. I rated based solely on enjoyment/entertainment (which is why I rated Twilight 5 stars. It deserves one or two stars, as far as actual content/writing). Now, I still rate based on that but I also try to factor in the quality of characters, writing, and sometimes I'll even complain about the way a book was marketed. Something I do that I don't see many others do is almost never give out 1 stars. I've read/rated over 400 books on GR and only have 12 1-stars... I reserve them or books with huge issues (like homophobia, racism, etc)
Tucker wrote: "My rating system used to be similar to that. I rated based solely on enjoyment/entertainment (which is why I rated Twilight 5 stars. It deserves one or two stars, as far as actual content/writing)...."Oh that's interesting. I definitely factor in other things besides entertainment, which is why some things have half-stars and are rated up by the skins of their little book teeth. :) I give out decent amount of 1* because if I really don't like a book, it feels disingenuous rating it as "meh" with my current system. :/ I can understand wanting to save those for the worst of the worst, though.
I have 1437 ratings and it's stratified about as I expected
10% of my books are amazing 5*
29% of my books are really liked 4*
28% of my books are good 3*
19% of my books are meh 2*
12% of my books are dislike 1*
There is a New York Times interview within the last month with John Scalzi. They asked him what his guilty pleasure was. He said "Nothing. If I enjoy what I am reading, why should I feel guilty."
Robert wrote: "There is a New York Times interview within the last month with John Scalzi. They asked him what his guilty pleasure was. He said "Nothing. If I enjoy what I am reading, why should I feel guilty.""That's admirable. I feel like there's so much intellectual shaming in the literary arena though that it's hard to un-internalize some of the shame readers are made to feel about reading certain things. Like romance novels, adults reading manga and YA, etc.
I agree - I honestly think more problems would be solved if people read more, as opposed to screen content. (And blah blah blah, I know this is a WEB SITE and an APP, blah blah shut your yap)
Robert wrote: "I agree - I honestly think more problems would be solved if people read more, as opposed to screen content. (And blah blah blah, I know this is a WEB SITE and an APP, blah blah shut your yap)"Reading more is definitely good, although I feel like the internet has actually helped in some ways. I read more now with ebooks than I ever did with just paperbacks, and I never used to read the newspaper at all but now I read all the time on my phone. I wish that more people were willing to read outside of the genres that feel comfortable. I suspect that many people-- men and women-- who picked up a romance novel for example, might be pleasantly surprised.
I just managed to trick my mom into liking a chick lit LOL.
Robert wrote: "There is a New York Times interview within the last month with John Scalzi. They asked him what his guilty pleasure was. He said "Nothing. If I enjoy what I am reading, why should I feel guilty.""I really like that he said that but does he read monster-erotica? I mean that's absolutely my guilty pleasure. It really doesn't makes sense that I even like the stuff. But sometimes I just want to.
So I do think people have guilty pleasure read. Because let's be honest nobody admits everything they like and why should they?
@Nenia, my rating system is very much based on enjoyment. Partially because I'm too lazy to critically review a book and partly because I read a lot of 2/3 stars books which I don't mind. It will let me know a genre very well. And I actually enjoy that a lot.
p.s. tip for your mom: call chick lit 'women's fiction'. Most of the time it's the same thing! But based on the cover it seems like it's very different genre.
He failed to state that, but he did imply an enjoyment of that genre. Evidently he likes stories about erotic encounters between old Universal monsters, like the Mummy and Frankenstein fall in love.
Robert wrote: "He failed to state that, but he did imply an enjoyment of that genre. Evidently he likes stories about erotic encounters between old Universal monsters, like the Mummy and Frankenstein fall in love."That's totally awesome! Whelp, then I'll take (sorta) back my words :D
Ada wrote: "Robert wrote: "There is a New York Times interview within the last month with John Scalzi. They asked him what his guilty pleasure was. He said "Nothing. If I enjoy what I am reading, why should I ..."Ooooh, what a clever way to sneak more chick lit to my mom!
Enjoyment-based ratings make sense to me. I think it's too hard to rate based on the merits of a book, since that's so subjective, whereas you can usually tell how much you liked or disliked a book.
