Cheryl’s Comments (group member since Jul 30, 2011)

Cheryl’s comments from the More than Just a Rating group.

That's a neat trick, to leave them marked as currently reading until you're ready to give them a proper review.

I can see that it would be a good idea to sit on a book for a little while before rating or reviewing, seeing as how the majority of you seem to be doing so effectively. I think I'm too hasty to judge.

Sure, it doesn't matter, really, but I think it's interesting to see who does what and why, and what effect their choice has on them.

My concern about writing my review promptly is that, as I'll be reading another book during that 'fallow' time, I'll forget too much of it. But that's back-asswards, isn't it? If the book was that forgettable, either I rushed through it too fast, or the rating of it needs to be lower. Well, that's what I think right now, anyway. :)

Yes, good point. Sometimes it's ok if the author has an agenda, but not if s/he pretends or implies neutrality. I'd much prefer, in most cases, to read a book that presents ideas and says 'here's something that I've concluded from all this information' rather than one that tries to convince you of something by saying 'here's my idea, and here's some support for it.' In the latter case I'm always left wondering what studies & resources were left out, how much data is available that doesn't support the premise.

Similarily, some non-fiction is going to be more dense, and some cannot be written as a narrative. But that doesn't mean they have to be in-accessible.

I just read a batch of reviews for Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed and some said it was dense and 'wonky' and some said it was surprisingly accessible... So, what I'd like to have seen those reviewers write, would be, what was it that actually made it so wonky, what was it that made it more accessible... - ?

I used to decide the rating of a book the moment I finished. In fact, I could usually guess by 1/2way through, or even earlier, what the final rating would be.

But lately as I've written longer and more careful reviews, I find myself often revising that rating based on what I found myself emphasizing in my review. For example I just was disappointed by In the Stacks: Short Stories about Libraries and Librarians. I assumed I was going to rate it 2 stars because it wasn't *horrible.* But then I wrote my review. And I couldn't find one nice thing about it, so I decided to go ahead and take it all the way down to 1 star.

What do you do?

bump - I'd really like more thoughts on this topic, esp. re' Science and History.

I really did love it. I really want to read other Readers' Advisory books now, but the library doesn't let me check them out.

Um, sorry if I wasn't clear, or maybe you really mean it....

I'm talking mainly about books that you're never going to actually finish reading, or read through. Ok, I can see that something like, say, a cookbook that you own and refer to often, can go back on to-read - but a book you actually gave up on and are *never* going to finish reading? Are you saying that you put *those* books back on to-read?

Believe me, I'm not arguing - it's fascinating to me to see everyone's different ideas on how to organize their shelves and their reading.

I just read Readers' Advisory Service in the Public Library and was blown away. The chapter on "Articulating a Book's Appeal" would be especially helpful for anyone looking for ideas how to improve their reviews. It could also be used to develop a template for those who want a guide to reading & reviewing books.

... and you still want to make a record of it, what do you do? I'm talking about books you did not finish, which we've referred to before, the DNFs. *And* I'm talking about texts, anthologies, how-to guides, maybe even references like thesauri and cookbooks, maybe sacred texts....

How do you shelve these different kinds of books? Do you rate them? Review them? Put them on your 'read' shelf? Give them a date read (y'know, the field that makes the book count for the challenge if you're participating in it)?

I've been having fun myself, lately, using that strategy. I don't worry so much about actually reviewing a bunch of aspects about the book, but (especially if there are already enough thorough reviews), starting with what got my attention and talking about that.

But a lot of people like a guide, a scaffold. Doesn't mean they aren't capable of writing an interesting review that is still idiosyncratic to their perceptions, but just that they want support to help them get going.

I think I'll be checking out some of your reviews now, Erin... :)

I like your ideas. Especially about making it personal, and not being afraid to say what wasn't perfect about the book.

Thanks for the tip about Cliffs Notes. I look to them more for contextual stuff myself - for instance understanding the historical events that may influence the lives of the family in the story. And they're helpful when understanding archaic slang and allusions. But you're right we should use them with care, for sure!

Thank you so much for sharing!

I'm so glad you're doing that. This way the narrator gets credit, and goodreads members have lots more accurate information about each title.

www.librivox.org has lots of good stories, totally free.

Huh? I have no opinion of Twilight, much less of the folks who read it. It's the phrasing of your review of Blubber that's suspect. I didn't mean to start an off-topic discussion, sorry for the confusion.

Hm. I personally would prefer to read reviews with a bit more tact. The review, in my very own personal opinion, shouldn't be too much about the how clever the reviewer is.

And re Blubber, especially, a nod to the fans of the novel, a mention of something redeeming (even if only in the history of the book) would help the review be more believable and effective. Trashing the book in the manner that you did makes it seem like you think people who liked it are idiots. Which means you'll lose credibility, because really, there's no way that all the tens of thousands (or whatever) people who loved the book are that stupid or blind.

Just my own reaction. I do know lots of people here on GR like biting reviews, so I don't speak for that segment of the membership. :)

And of course you are clever, and coherent, and you do pretty much justify your opinions, so keep it up!

Fair enough!

Yeah, upon re-reading with your thoughts in mind... the two sentences with 'something' in them are basically restatements of each other. Edited & improved.

References to other children's books and to 'board books' I will keep. I'm only speaking to people who actually have an interest in, and understanding of, children's books, after all.

I've done some edits based on your suggestions, so Thank You!

Wow. Y'know, even though I'm trained as a teacher and love children's books, I've never read Johnny Tremain. Your review does a perfect job of convincing me to skip it.

You're obviously thoughtful and intelligent, so I want to say something more than 'good job' about all the effort you put into your reviews. So, here's a possible suggestion: Maybe for this one you want to try to say a bit about why you think it's so popular & famous. Is it just because teachers need historical fiction to help them reach their students? Is there something the book does that you don't like but other people might like?

Oh, and possibly you might want to offer other related works that readers could choose instead of this one, if you know of any worth recommending.

I look forward to reading more of your reviews in the future!

Ok, I liked the one for The Overton Window. It was kinda longish, so I skimmed the description of the book part. I love the final paragraph - and the fact that you took the time before that to support your perspective. I liked how I could predict your star rating from your review (nothing irritates or confuses me more than when someone says 'great book' and then gives it three stars).

Oh my, that is excellent. I just tested it on a couple of issues I've known about and the explanations are clear and easy. Thank you for posting!

I'm thankful for GR and all you lovely people here!