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

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

I inherited a few 'Cliff's Notes' study guides years back, and read them, then tried to read the book they each were annotating. It was helpful. As BunWat says, often context & an understanding of what new ground was broken, etc. is key.

tx for the information, folks :)

So are you saying that abridgements and adaptations should be drawn to the attention of the librarians so that they can un-combine them?

And what about translations?

Sorry the posts overlapped. I was working on my reply to BunWat while Elizabeth posted her reply to her. In other words, my post is *not* a response to Elizabeth's. Moving along...

Looks like the edition Hague illustrated is actually the abridgement, and descriptions have gotten conflated and garbled. I'm too inexperienced as a librarian to sort it out, though, even if you tell me that abridgements belong in a separate listing.

Right. But different illustrations, or audio voices, or even other considerations, can make a huge difference in how a book is appreciated. I did write an edition specific review.

I understand that translations are also combined by the policy of the librarian's manual? If so, Elizabeth's recommendation is especially relevant to experienced reviewers who want to make sure that their review is actually helpful to others.

For example, in the English book, the pirate Smee is described as 'pathetic.' The word was used in a way slightly different than I've seen before, and I never got a handle on what Barrie meant. An illustrator might be able to offer an interpretation of Smee's character. An illustrator contemporary to Barrie might interpret more accurately Barrie's intended meaning.

Also, in translation, I imagine it would be possible for 'pathetic' to mean different things to different translators. Possibly one Chinese translation would use a word that implies something more like "degraded" and another would imply "silly." (Both those meanings were possibilities as I was reading.)

And what about abridgements? Those seem to get included in combined editions, too. The Aladdin Classic, ISBN 0689866917, admits to being a simplified retelling. How can a review of that apply to the original?

ooh... good idea, Sarah!

Those are excellent questions Elizabeth for any number of children's books. I'll try to keep them in mind more often.

Btw, specifically I'd say "most people who like the adaptions would probably enjoy the book, sharing would work well with a child as young as 4, independent readers should be at least 8, no upper limit, and not enough dialogue for reader's theatre."

Well BunWat, I like your suggestion, but somehow I'm thinking you have more cajones than I.

Sure, Danielle, adding the 'if...' clause is perfect. I just found myself recommending a book in a group using the "you'll love this..." phrasing and I had to rewrite my post - it's a natural tendency to want to speak to your reader. :)

love it!

Fair enough - we each rate how we feel for ourselves. I'm glad I started this topic so we can get viewpoints like yours.

I do hope you find more treasures though so your average goes up a little! :)

The other Hugh reminded me of one of my peeves. I see it more often in discussions (in groups, for example) than in reviews, but either way it bothers me.

Please don't tell me "Oh you'll this book the romance was so sweet and the plot was exciting." Instead, tell me "Oh I loved this book the romance...." See the difference? One is sharing your reaction, the other is bossing me and/or telling me that you'll think less of me if I don't agree with you.

I can't tell you how often I've seen people in forums say "You gotta read Girl with the Dragon Tattoo you'll love it!" Um, no, not gonna, and know I won't. (I have no idea why that particular book seems to garner that reaction so often - do you?)

Good point about the reviewer saying "I liked this" rather than "You'll like this." It's actually a pet peeve of mine, so off I go to that thread.

And yes, of course, please continue to share your opinions! :)

*Much* more expensive. You don't need the card, or the tin - just buy them in bulk, share some with your friends, you won't regret it!

So anyway, I just reviewed Peter Pan. There is no way I can say anything that hasn't been said before, and better. So, I just mentioned a couple of minor aspects that surprised me and moved on.

What else could I have considered doing? What do you all do when trying to share your opinion of a book that already has a zillion reviews, that's already at least somewhat familiar to most readers?

And, BunWat, excellent point. Reviewers do have a responsibility to fact-check.

Actually, I don't feel enlightened by the review whether it says 'kept my attention' or 'couldn't put it down.'

I want to know why you were spellbound. Was it simply because it was a well-done action-driven thriller? Was it because you cared about the characters so much? Was it because the language was so gorgeous?

Oy. Y'all are making my head spin - and I like numbers and math!

bookdarts.com - they slip onto the page to mark the exact line you want to remember, like a totally non-damaging paperclip or reusable highlighter - I bought the bulk pack because they are so unobtrusive I sometimes forget them and they are lost to the library...

I assume, Hugh, that you're implying we'd choose the third group. With all due respect, I disagree. I want more specifics than that. I agree, TJ, that I don't want a whole book about a book. But I do want a bit more of a thorough reaction.

To go back to Hugh's example, I'd say, leave out the yadda, then give me all three paragraphs. Pros, cons, and a bit of analysis so I know whether what you think is 'cool' is the same as what I think is 'cool.'

So, yeah, sticking with calling these comments/ reactions/ opinions reviews works for me, as it's a little nudge to give potential readers a bit more substance. :)

I forgot to bring over BunWat's tip (from 'Do we always have to mark spoilers?). This helped me even more after reading Vicky's explanation of html.

She said:

"So basically any of the tags work the same

write many watermelony things

say something very ironic

These don't work because there is no watermelon tag or irony tag, so you can see the structure. But if you were to put spoiler, or b (for bold) or i (for italics) where I wrote watermelon or irony, then you'd have a working tag."

Yay Hugh! You got it!