Reviewers puzzle me
I don't read reviews when selecting books to read or movies to watch because I like to decide for myself how I feel or what I think without the possible bias another opinion might bring to bear on my thought process. However I do read reviews of my own work.
Having this kind of exposure to reviewers has taught me several things. First: I am entirely correct not to read reviews, and second: there exists a class of reviewers who will go so far as to cite scenes in a work that do not exist as a reason for the author's failure to win this particular reader over. Why do that? Especially when it's already been stated at length that the reviewer doesn't like anything at all about the book. Why take the extra step of inventing a scene?
Isn't it enough to just eviscerate what's actually contained in the pages?
Having this kind of exposure to reviewers has taught me several things. First: I am entirely correct not to read reviews, and second: there exists a class of reviewers who will go so far as to cite scenes in a work that do not exist as a reason for the author's failure to win this particular reader over. Why do that? Especially when it's already been stated at length that the reviewer doesn't like anything at all about the book. Why take the extra step of inventing a scene?
Isn't it enough to just eviscerate what's actually contained in the pages?
date
newest »
newest »
All the rave reviews don't tell me much but it's incredible how many of the negative reviews of gay books on Amazon are because the books have gay characters, unlikeable people, bdsm, are too long, etc.
Their dislikes are my favorites and any really nasty reviews let me know the book has an emotional impact and that's another reason to read it.