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

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

That is kinda funny; I thank you for sharing.

Yes, since Amazon does own GR, they could decide that we who use libraries, friends' collections, etc. are not worthy of being served.

I need the cataloguing here and the groups, as well as the reviews from real readers. Well, need is an absolute, but really really would hate to lose.

Indeed. And The Guardian quoted disgruntled authors, but not Otis or any reviewer, staff member, or anyone from GR.

There's another problem; apparently Amazon is trying to build a competitor for GR. I'm worried. I really don't want this site to fold.

Becky wrote: "...If they found it confusing and thought that X did Y in the book, when it was really A who did Z, it's unlikely that them knowing that would make them feel differently about the whole book. ..."

Good point.

I would definitely welcome more (authentic, respectful) comments on my reviews. And I do comment on Friends' and Followers.' (If we're not connected yet, and it seems that we're not, we should be, sorry.)

If the review is blatantly about the wrong book, I let them know. If it's a book that doesn't have a lot of reviews, I'll give them a chance to fix it, and if they don't, I'll flag.

But usually I add a preface to my own review: "In another review, the reader said X, but the book actually said Y." And then I make sure that review goes out in my feed.

Beth wrote: "I like the idea of solidification. I try to remember to add the star rating last because the "read" status goes into the feed the moment you change it, and it's a little embarrassing to get likes o..."

Oh, I didn't realize this. Thanks for the tip!

I should consider rating last myself. After all, I often do change it after writing the review.

:blush:

Honestly, I think that's the best way. I just feel a bit of shelf-pride when I get through a more *L*iterary or *C*lassic book. :blush:

I am so glad to see you here. Yes, it's true, this group will not take up much of your time. But we're always here for each other!

I particularly identify with this, from your delightful intro.:

"I tend to 'solidify' my opinions about it, either talking myself up or down in rating. Maybe I was liking it well enough while reading, but as I start to explain why and pick it apart, I realize that I actually disliked it a lot more than I originally thought."

Me too!

Becky wrote: "L J wrote: "Recently I've struggled to fairly review books I would have liked far more if I hadn't already read books by the authors. It's not that I really dislike what the authors write it's just..."

Yes! If the author's voice & style is distinct, it needs to be flexible to match the book. Otherwise, write quietly and let the reader focus on the other elements.

I vote you leave it unrated, and put it in the review, perhaps with the word 'predictable.' I've also used the words, in re' series, tired and workmanlike.

I have found that I did rate my series, Star Trek TNG, a little lower, on average, than more 'literary' books that gave me the same level of enjoyment. I kept reading, even though most got three stars.

Then again, the only ppl reading those reviews are those who know not to expect *L*iterature! So maybe it doesn't matter a whole lot, to try to be fair or consistent. Not all my four-star books are equally worthy of that rating, especially.

GR has long said that reviewers' spaces are supposed to be safe from authors' influences. I sure hope that doesn't change!

And yes, three stars is plenty, not worthy of complaint.

lots different ways to think about this... interesting... thanks, all!

Maybe it would be better if they put analysis, personal reaction, first, then summary. :sigh:

I'm annoyed by them, but I remind myself that goodreads members usually write reviews for themselves, and that's fine. I still wish they'd say what they thought.

And if they copy the book's own blurb word for word, that's not cool. Even if they use quotation marks, but especially when they don't.

Iow, I think it's a bit better if they write their own synopsis.

Oh yay! Thanks for letting us know!

Weird is a good word.

Or a spaceship on every SF, yes, I agree!

(I mean to say, there is a spaceship on the cover of a lot of SF books where there isn't a spaceship important to the story.)