All About Books discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
General Archive
>
What have you just read? Opinions, recommendations & reviews
Just finished listening to Dollbaby18693929
a family saga/social commentary on life in New Orleans in the 1960's. Here is my review https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...And also just finished Insincere
|, the 2nd in the exciting Detective Elizabeth Ireland series. Here is my review https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
If I finish a book, I will rate it, even if it gets a 1 or 2 star rating, and I try to say why. If I don't finish a book I don't rate it.I think a 3-star rating means an enjoyable, solid story.
Thia vweek I finished 2 books:
Someone Else's Love Story - I enjoy Joshilyn Jackson's books and this one is no exception.
Review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
The House at Riverton - this is the second of Kate Morton's books that I've read and I really like them. This is her debut novel and as such is a terrific story.
Review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
I agree with you Petra.....but even if I do not finish a book, I say why.
Mod
Me either, but that's mainly due to my ability (at least lately) to avoid books I won't like. It's common that I expect to love a book and only like it or vice versa,
Most books I'll hate I usually know in advance. For me books to avoid are ones that have very dull, dry language (but I can cull those out browsing the bookstore or library; so I never read those) or books that disgust me with a callous or offensive worldview of the author, not of the characters, a "greed is good" attitude or something like that. Rarely do I get fooled into picking up a book in that second category - the last time was pre-Goodreads.
Greg wrote: "Me either, but that's mainly due to my ability (at least lately) to avoid books I won't like..."That's a good point Greg, I am willing to give *almost* anything a try :-)
I feel I can't say that I don't like a book/author unless I've tried it, similar to one bite rule for picky eaters haha
I like variety, I jump a lot between genres and writing styles, I had many good surprises and a few duds
Just finished The Cleaner
by Paul Cleave. One heck of a debut novel! Here is my review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Mod
I feel I can't say that I don't like a book/author unless I've tried it, similar to one bite rule for picky eaters haha
I like variety, I jump a lot between genres and writing styles, I had many good surprises and a few duds ..."
I applaud that Kiwi - you might end up with a few clunkers, but then you get the nice surprises too. I have to say that since I joined Goodreads, I've made discoveries via group reads that I'd never have tried on my own. It's a good thing!
Dhanaraj wrote: "I too do not like to give two stars or a star to a book. If I truly did not like a book, I abstain from giving stars at all. The lowest in my grade is three. The top class work is five stars."While I understand your feeling, I think that people refraining from giving the lower number of stars ends up skewing the ratings.
Leslie wrote: "Dhanaraj wrote: "I too do not like to give two stars or a star to a book. If I truly did not like a book, I abstain from giving stars at all. The lowest in my grade is three. The top class work is ..."totally agree with you Leslie!
Greg wrote: "Kiwi wrote: "I am willing to give *almost* anything a try :-)I feel I can't say that I don't like a book/author unless I've tried it, similar to one bite rule for picky eaters haha
I like variety,..."
me too Greg....I never thought I would like fantasy, but I have been introduced to Neil Gaiman via a group read, and I just love him!
Leslie wrote: "Dhanaraj wrote: "I too do not like to give two stars or a star to a book. If I truly did not like a book, I abstain from giving stars at all. The lowest in my grade is three. The top class work is ..."The ratings are skewed anyway because everyone wants to use their own system. In my case, I do give 1 and 2 star-ratings when I come across them, but that's rare. Almost every book is 3 stars at least given that three is the halfway point on the scale.
Mod
That's great Sandy! :)
Greg wrote: " since I joined Goodreads, I've made discoveries via group reads that I'd never have tried on my own. It's a good thing! "Amen to that!
Another reason for giving low ratings as well as good ones is GR recommendations, by stating what I liked and what I didn't, I get recommendations tailored to my tastes.
Leslie wrote: "Dhanaraj wrote: "I too do not like to give two stars or a star to a book. If I truly did not like a book, I abstain from giving stars at all. The lowest in my grade is three. The top class work is ..."Usually I choose a book to read. There are certain authors whose books I buy without giving a thought to any opinion. Or else, usually I choose a book that is well received or held in high esteem (the prize winners for example) or that come as recommendation from my good friends. So naturally the three stars as the lowest grade is ok for me. As Chuck mentioned the rating system is anyway skewed owing to subjectivity of every individual reader. I think I get used to a rating of a person/friend after some regular observations. I sometimes depend on such readers/friends in choosing a book. I do not go along with the majority rating. I look for the rating of my chosen 'agent.'
Mod
Good point Kiwi!
Leslie wrote: "I think that people refraining from giving the lower number of stars ends up skewing the ratings. "Ditto.
That's probably true. But for some books I read I think the ratings are skewed towards the negative. I rate books on the higher end, but I scope out what books I want to read pretty carefully.
Books that I'm sure I won't like, I often give a pass to. Life is short. So why spend time reading books I don't think i'll like?
Tejas Janet wrote: "That's probably true. But for some books I read I think the ratings are skewed towards the negative. I rate books on the higher end, but I scope out what books I want to read pretty carefully.
Books that I'm sure I won't like, I often give a pass to. Life is short. So why spend time reading books I don't think i'll like?"
I agree - why waste time on books I don't like, only to give them a low rating? I like to read reviews, but I am not swayed by low ratings if it is something that I want to try anyway. For instance, Gillian Flynn is an author that people seem to either love or hate - I love her, so my ratings will be higher and people may say "How can you read such disturbing stuff?" On the other hand, I had no desire to continue reading "50 Shades of Grey" long enough to give it a low rating because I felt it wasn't well written.
I am very selective in what I read. I explore new authors all the time, but I do a fair amount of research ahead of time. Genre is important as I know there are some genres I do enjoy as much today as others, and I can't say that I ignore the overall rating, but ratings by individuals who I trust and who have similar tastes are most important. I value someone who is willing to give a one-star or two-star rating. It is as important to me to know what they dislike as what they like. Because I do a fair amount of research before picking something to read, I don't give many low ratings, but occasionally I will read something by an author I typically love that is just not up to his or her standard, in my opinion, and I rate it accordingly. I occasionally find that something the majority of other readers love I simply don't like. Sometimes it might be what is considered a standard classic. It those cases I try to determine why I didn't like it and most others did, but I rate it low so others will know that not everybody likes it. I also like when GR readers clearly indicate what they abandon. I abandon very few, but if I do, I rate it. If I dislike it enough to abandon it, then I dislike it enough to rate it low.
Ok Albert, you convinced me - many times I feel that my one little opinion isn't worth much, but I will rate even the books I abandon, if I dislike them that much and others can judge for themselves whether to be swayed by my opinion. I will put a disclaimer that I did not finish the book.
I recently finished listening to A Spool of Blue Thread. Not my first Anne Tyler. Very consistent with what I have read from her in the past. Rich, well-developed characters. While I think she is a very good writer, not someone I will likely go back to in the future.https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
I've just finished my review of A Zoo in My Luggage by Gerald DurrellLink here
I try to observe the Goodreads suggestions for rating, so as not to skew the statistics. I expect to like a book I read, so their 3 stars is my default, from which I adjust, but use all categories when necessary.
It's worth remembering too that the advice for Goodreads ratings is slightly different from Amazon's own.
AFAIC, the community rating is practically useless. Rarely do you see a book that's rated less than three, and the highest rating is usually just a little over four, so there's essentially just a 1-point spread to decide. And some of my favorite books are rated on the low side of that! Literary fiction doesn't get any love. So, I find it pretty useless. I think the best a person can do is find some like-minded individuals to friend and then use the "friends rating" as a deciding factor in their book choices.
Mod
Link here
I try to observe the Goodreads suggestions for rating, so as not to skew the statistics..."
Three stars is also my default. If I didn't like it it's a 2, if it went beyond expectations 4. 5 stars are for books I've really loved. Classics generally, but also books I really appreciated
I just finished reading The Book of Colors and was really taken by it. It's told in spare language and tells the story of a pregnant 19-year old trying to figure out her world, where she came from and what she has to offer her child. It's beautifully told and heartfelt, I thought. My review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
The Goodreads rating system is supposed to be:1 star: "did not like it."
2 stars: "it was okay"
3 stars: "liked it"
4 stars: "really liked it"
5 stars: "it was amazing"
So then, 3 stars is a good rating. 2 is a neutral rating and should be the default. But how many people ever see a book that's rated 3-stars and decide to read it? I think most people probably pass on books rated close to 3-stars because they know when people give a book 3-stars what they really saying is "it was okay."
Chuck wrote: "The good rating system is supposed to be:1 star: "did not like it."
2 stars: "it was okay"
3 stars: "liked it"
4 stars: "really liked it"
5 stars: "it was amazing"
So then, 3 stars is a good ra..."
It's because of this that I would like that people who don't like a book rate it with 1 or 2 stars. There is nothing wrong giving a low rating if we don't like a book. Of course I like also to read in a review why they didn't like it.
But as many others, I trust friend's ratings also because I now know their rating system. I know that for Chrissie 3 stars is a good rating and for Laura it is more an "it's ok" book.
I rarely trust reviews of people I don't know. I also happens that if a friend has different tastes, I know that what they will rate with 1 star it's a book I could like and what they rate with 5 stars it's surely a book I won't like.
Chuck - Not me! 3 means it was good, as I expected it to be when I picked it up, and so I "liked it". I do often give books 2 stars if they are OK and worth reading, but not worth being called "good". But then as you say, you get to know how your friends rate. I'm probably considered a low rater. I've occasionally been told that when people see a star rating of 2 stars, they are then surprised to read a fairly positive review.
The Amazon ratings are less subjective, but it's still worth trying to conform to those on Goodreads, I think.
Chuck, I stick to the GR rating! Maybe b/c I have been here from the beginning of GR. So much has changed.
All I'm saying is that since 3 is the halfway point between 1 and 5, many people mistakenly use 3-stars as their "neutral" rating. But really a neutral rating is 2, because 2 is the halfway point between 1 (did not like it) and 3 (liked it). I know this is the case because nobody rushes out to buy 3-star books. They see a book rated 3-stars, they pass on it. They at least look for something in the high threes--if not fours. Until this is fixed the rating system is practically useless. And bear in mind I'm not talking about "friends rating" or how friends rate. That's the only thing we can hope to do IMO: find people, learn how they tend to rate, and factor that into out choices. We are all in that business, I think.And FWIW, the lower someone's average rating is, the more I think I can trust them.
I'm with Jean, half way is 2.5 stars. If I find a book so-so and I'm not likely to read another book from the same the author, it gets a 2 stars rating. 3 stars are reserved for books that I liked and are above the half way mark. I trust friends ratings to a degree and after a while, like dely said, you get to know how they rate and you make your own choices.
It's also important to consider the number of reviews a book has, the higher the number the more likely the ratings average out to a better representation of their popularity.
Chuck, you're losing me with all your acronyms:)I think I was probably a med to high rater, and now will sometimes downgrade past books from a 5 to a 4. This is often why I'll do a re-read of a book.
If friends like the same writing styles and authors/genres I do, then I'll see how they rated a book before I read it. If they like styles and authors/genres I don't read, then I won't mark it on my tbr.
I know Chrissie and other's ways of rating, but have to go with gut instinct when I read reviews by people I don't know. I'll often check out what they usually read before I'll add the books to my tbr.
I have a series of 'checks and balances' which a book goes thru before I read it, so mainly I rate as 4 or 5 stars.
Any psychologists among us? Has anyone thought about the motivations behind grading? Do people always apply their grades for the right reasons? Or are they sometimes tailored for effect? Do they perhaps think that more people just read 1 star or 5 star community reviews perhaps, for their entertainment value? (Tough then, on those of us who reserve those grades for the exceptions!) And then there are those who add on a star for a new author, to encourage them. Yes, I've been told both these are true.
Jean just in cynic mode here ;)
Kiwi wrote: " I'm with Jean, half way is 2.5 stars.2.5 is the halfway point between 0 and 5. I think Jean is saying 2 is her neutral rating (as it should be being it's the halfway point between 1 and 3).
Kiwi wrote: "
3 stars are reserved for books that I liked and are above the half way mark. "
Right. According to the suggested GR rating system, 3 is a positive rating. In mathematics, it's the halfway point between 1 and 5, though.
Mod
I don't pay much attention to low ratings anyway because often when people rate a classic low it was because they didn't connect with or truly understand it. No value judgement there - I don't connect with everything either. But I do think reading comprehension is like a muscle that can be developed. If you bring up any classic, you'll see loads of 1 star ratings. It was discouraging at first to see books I love rated like that, but nowadays I take it lightly. So low ratings of classics or literary fiction I take with a grain of salt. It seems the more poor ratings there are, the more likely the book is to be a subtle and indirect and the more I'll probably like it!
Thoughtful reviews on the other hand can make a difference - if I see a lot of comments about a book being stark, the characters unredeeming, and the writing gritty, I might wait to be in a certain mood before I read it.
I do find that before I buy a book, I scan my trusted friends' ratings as a whole (people that generally read the sort of books I like). If I see at least a few high ratings (4 to 5), I assume there must be at least something in the book to get. No telling for sure how much I'll connect with the material, but I at least can trust in a decent quality of writing. I usually don't worry too much about the lower ratings because those are more about personal connection with the material .. but if almost all my trusted friends' reviews are 3 and lower; I will be very leery!
Jean wrote: "Any psychologists among us? Has anyone thought about the motivations behind grading? Do people always apply their grades for the right reasons? Or are they sometimes tailored for effect? Do they ..."
Do people always apply their grades for the right reasons? I'm not a psychologist, but I think the answer is no. I see people give low ratings to books that aren't even out yet given they disagree with the author's politics or some such thing.
Greg wrote: "Chuck wrote: " So low ratings of classics or literary fiction I take with a grain of salt. "When I see someone has given a low rating to a literary fiction book I was going to read, I go to their profile and take a look at the type of books they rate highly and factor that in. If I see paranormal romance or some such thing is their favorite genre, I completely discount their opinion/rating. If I see they do read classics and literary fiction, I probably won't read the book.
Oh, dear. I simple-mindedly rate books by the definitions as listed by Chuck. Not anything to do with good or bad - after all Diary Of A Wimpy Kid books 1-4 has an average of 4.47, and War And Peace has 4.09. Nor to do with an average book being 2.5. Just whether it was a didn't like, an okay, a liked, a really liked, or an amazing. My rankings are pretty high, mainly because I rarely choose to read a book without getting to know about it first.But being positive, it's been suggested in other threads that GR could have a sliding scale from 0 to 5, where one could slide an icon anywhere along the scale. Technically easy, and very common elsewhere.
Mod
It's odd though. Even among trusted friends, I see 1 or 2 star ratings of books I think are wonderful! So a few low ratings don't deter me at all. The absence of high ratings though seems to have a much bigger correlation (a much better predictor). If I see no 4 or 5 star ratings of a book among those trusted friends that I often agree with, it often does end up being quite terrible.
Everyone has made really good points in this discussion--or I think they're good points because I agree with them! ;) I hope I didn't rub anyone the wrong way or anything. I've probably said too much. But I just wanted to be sure we were all on the same page. Happy reading, Bookworms! (I'll be quite for a while now.)
I think you're fine Chuck! Just healthy discussion as far as I can see anyway. Same goes for me though, bowing out now :)
Mod
I agree! Didn't see anything bad at all Chuck. I think it's interesting to see not only people rate but also how people make use of ratings. I've found the whole discussion very thought provoking.
I enjoy reading negative reviews of books I've loved but otherwise I basically ignore ratings. I base my choice of books on the synopsis and if my friends in here recommend. I really don't care if it has lots of 1 or 2 star ratings if I want to give it a go
Greg wrote: "Jean wrote: "I think you're fine Chuck! Just healthy discussion as far as I can see anyway. Same goes for me though, bowing out now :)"I agree! Didn't see anything bad at all Chuck. I think it's ..."
I agree. Just useful Chuck, to see how others think through and apply the rating process. The other thing to factor in with reading and reviewing is sometimes a book just doesn't hit the mark with a reader because they had different expectations, or they were in the wrong frame of mind for it. Other times it can depend on what else they read just before it and how good that was. But a good book will often transcend all these things.
Just finished 311 Pelican Court. My go to 'easy' series. My review:https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Completed reading Primo Levi's The Periodic Table. An important historical document.4 stars. The review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
All About Books
Books mentioned in this topic
Red Shoes for Rachel: Three Novellas (other topics)Kindred (other topics)
Kindred (other topics)
Kindred (other topics)
The Promise Girls (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Octavia E. Butler (other topics)Octavia E. Butler (other topics)
Octavia E. Butler (other topics)
Marie Bostwick (other topics)
Deon Meyer (other topics)
More...
I ditto Chrissie. I do not like to give one and two stars (books I could not finish and OK read respectively) but I do so with the idea that other readers can have a balanced view of what a book is really like. 3 stars are reserved for books that I genuinely liked but I don't feel to rave about.
I frequently skim GR reviews of a book to get a feeling of its popularity or whether I may like it, sometimes you can immediately see that a book is polarizing. With negative reviews, I make a point of explaining what I did like and what I didn't, we all appreciate different things in a book and what I count as a deal-breaker may be of no or little consequence to someone else.
I support the suggestion of half stars in ratings. I often find that some of my reads are really in between, in that case I add the actual rating to my reviews and explain why I round up or down. When trying to decide between a 3 or 4 stars I ask myself "would recommend it to someone?" or "would I continue the series?" or "Would I want to read another or his/her books?", this usually helps me decide :)
I like what Terry said "re-rate a book from 5 down to 4 stars when the "book afterglow" wears off.
I've felt the need to adjust my rating only occasionally, both down and up (when I realise that I can't recall the book details anymore or when I catch myself thinking about a book long after I read it)