Do you find it easier to review books the first time you read them?

[Sparrowlicious]

I'm the sort of person who blabs about books on their blog. I don't talk about EVERY single book I read because with some I don't know what to say. Also, I need to let it "sit" for a while before I can write about the book. Sometimes up to a week. That's because I find it hard to find the right words and sometimes I tend to give the negative parts of really anything too much weight.
So letting things sink in for a while helps me a lot.

I should be mentioned that I'm not a literature analyst or anything so I simply write about what I liked or didn't like about a book. So yes, my "reviews" are rather simple. (I find it hard to write about the plot of a book without spoiling it.)

[Christian]

I can't recall a single book, or series, that I've ever reread. Perhaps LoTR. I commend people who have the time and patience for that undertaking. I'm a slow reader, and a thorough one, so I don't feel that I've missed enough to warrant a second read.

[Ubaidulla.t.s]

I can imbibe the ideas and put down a comment on it.... take time to accomplish reading process. mostly i cede ground to laziness

[Aaron]

I normally don't read a book more then once but for movies/animes when I watched them a second time because a friend never saw it. Sometimes in the artsier films the rating would go up and on others it would be a good bit worse on a rewatch. Many review sites do have a catagory for rewatchablity, so that would help if it got worse on rewatch, but if it got a good bit better I normally bumped up the old rating and had a disclaimer at the top.

[Earl]

If the book's short enough, I would definitely prefer to read it twice before I feel comfortable reviewing it critically. But as long as I know beforehand that I'm going to be reviewing the book in question, I can usually do the review to my satisfaction with just one read.

[Carol]

I review books after one good read.

[CS]

I form my opinion immediately after finishing a book. I do give myself a little time to think about the book as a whole and what I like or dislike about it. Then I start jotting down notes. I never reread for a review. The person I'm writing for, a potential reader, may not reread. So I go with my gut reaction and my first impression.

[Joe]

I tend to wait a few hours after I finish to reflect on everything, since it generally takes me a few days to a week to read an entire book.

[Steven]

All,
Just noticed this thread and decided to chirp it with a slightly different POV: in my "official reviewing capacity" on Bookpleasures.com, I tend to read books I review twice. The first time I just read for R&R, like most readers. The second time I put my editor's hat on (I'm also an author besides being an avid reader) and get picky about all the elements of good writing (fiction and non-fiction differ in important ways, of course). If I come up with just a short list of editing corrections, I often send the list to the author and give him a pass. I'm a bit more demonstrative in my review about other mechanics. And I'll mention all the things I like too.
Of course, I'm not writing these reviews for Amazon (btw, I'm not paid for these reviews--it's all voluntary).
My only pay is a free copy of the book to review. It's tedious when I have to remind the author or his marketing agent to send it along. This has happened a few times. You have to wonder....
A lot of people don't like writing reviews because they learned not to like them in high school English. But an acceptable review only has to say what you liked and disliked and why. You don't need to go into all the details I go into.
r/Steve

[[deleted user]]

I have never felt the compulsion to review any book I have ever read. I have written 3 novels published as eBook and paperback and from 100s of sales have attracted just 2 reviews and one of those I sought out. It seems to me that people review books more commonly when they are avid fans of the famous writer. There is rarely anything to say except, wow loved it or wow so disappointed. The fact that Amazon invite reviews of their cardboard boxes speaks volumes for the absurdity of the modern world.

[Steven]

N.J.,
A lot of truth in what you say, especially about the fandom. I review books I've read for R&R on Amazon (outside my official reviewing capacity) only when I'm enthusiastic or very disappointed. If you're correct (I think you are), that biases the reviews, making Amazon reviews pretty much worthless.
When I buy books on Amazon, I tend to avoid the reviews for the reasons you mention (or obvious bandwagons where everyone and his dog and cat jump on to review a book--The Martian is a recent example). Instead, I do a "peek inside" and read the blurb. The first tells me if the dude or dudette can write; the second tells me whether I might be interested in reading.
Inre "first time," though, it's best for me to review earlier than later, just because I read so many books!
r/Steve

[Johnny]

This is an interesting thread, and I understand how some might choose to ignore reviews, but I don’t understand the need to reject the validity of a reader’s passion for a story. If a book truly takes the reader into another world, which is what they’re meant to do, and a reader finds that world to be engaging, why wouldn’t they want to discuss it? It’s no different than finding an awesome meal at a restaurant and telling others how much you enjoyed it. It’s no secret many authors pay for reviews, and it throws a wrench in the system, but I’m honored to leave a review for a story that engages me, mostly because I found pleasure in the story, but also because it DOES support the author.


Even more interesting, NJ, is you claim reviews allowed by Amazon show the absurdity of the modern world, yet you have reviewed three of your own books. That seems a bit contradictory to me. As an author yourself, you probably understand the gaps of time that pass between each and every positive message, such as a review, so why wouldn’t you support a platform that provides you with an outlet you have chosen to become involved in?


Under Article ‘Z’ of friendly fire, I have to defend reviews in this case, and remain secure with the fact that each reader has a choice: to make a decision based on reviews, or make a decision based on that tiny spark of initial interest. I spot check the reviews of a book I find interesting, and, like many, can quickly decipher which readers have truly read the book, and which reviewers’ are basically spewing verbal diarrhea.


I write the review while the story is still fresh in my mind.

[YouKneeK]

I rarely re-read books, and I’ve only been writing reviews for 3 years, so I can’t answer the question as it was originally posed. I don’t think I’ve even written a review for a re-read yet.

I do review everything I read now, and writing the review has become an enjoyable part of finishing a book. I like to write it as soon as possible after finishing, while the story is fresh in my head. Instead of just jumping straight into the next book and getting caught up in a new story, writing a review forces me to take a few extra minutes to think back over what I’ve read, consider how it affected me, and put some more thought into what I did and didn’t like. Writing reviews helps me remember what I’ve read for longer than I used to, and I think it’s also helped me better understand what kinds of things I like and dislike in a story so I can make better choices about what to read.

I don’t write reviews for authors and I rarely give any thought to what the author would think of my review if he or she happened to read it. I do enjoy the social aspect of being able to discuss reviews with other people who have read the same books, and I especially love it when somebody I’m following reviews a book that I’ve read. I think it’s fun to see the different opinions and interpretations that are triggered by the same set of words. Even so, if all the social book sites vanished, I would still write reviews offline for my own sake because it’s a process that I find enjoyable and beneficial.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

YouKneeK wrote: "I rarely re-read books, and I’ve only been writing reviews for 3 years, so I can’t answer the question as it was originally posed. I don’t think I’ve even written a review for a re-read yet.

I do ..."

I like/resonate with this. Well said, YouKneeK.

I like reviews for all things, even biased ones, so I hope as many of us review things as often as possible! I crowd-source just about every purchase, from cat litter to vacations, so the thoughtful feedback for books provided by people like y'all is a huge deal for me, as a reader, regardless of your motive :-)

[Steven]

Allison,
I hope you realize that many of those reviews from cat litter to vacations aren't "thoughtful feedback" but product reviews from reviewers paid by manufacturers. There are several scandals in recent news associated with this practice.
Maybe not so much for books? (Some authors do pay for them--Kirkus etc--not recommended!)
And I still have a problem with the "bandwagon effect." "Atta-girl" or "Atta-boy" and "This is crap" type reviews are mostly just people jumping on bandwagons. Can anyone convince me that all those reviews of The Martian are informative? That's more like American Idol...and Amazon is fine with this because they only care about the damn ranking.
In fact, I guarantee that once the number of thoughtful reviews is beyond a few dozens, there's nothing more to say about a book (the adjective "thoughtful" is key, of course--the bandwagon effect makes it almost impossible to find them).
I'll repeat: I never read a book, let alone review it, on the basis of previous reviews. Places like Amazon have made the reviewing process so questionable (and that's without considering those paid product reviews) that I just don't trust them.
Same goes for movie reviews, by the way, which is why I started writing my own so moviegoers have another source, at least. (BTW, move reviewers are paid to review movies--I'm not.)
I congratulate you on trying to be an informed consumer, but I'm not sure you're going about it the right way. That old maxim from the X-files is a propos: Trust no one! I'll soften that a wee bit: For books, use the "peek inside" feature and blurbs on Amazon--or the recommendation of your bookshop owner. For products, use Consumer Reports (NOT Consumers Digest!).
And here's a telling story: I once "reviewed" an inn we love on Cape Code on one of those travel sites. I immediately started to get bombarded by "Traveler Steve Moore rates X highly...." What does that prove? A lot of this crap is done by computers! ;-)
r/Steve

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

Steven wrote: "Allison,
I hope you realize that many of those reviews from cat litter to vacations aren't "thoughtful feedback" but product reviews from reviewers paid by manufacturers. There are several scandals..."

I assure you I am very aware of all of that, and regularly use sites that indicate the trustworthiness of the review (i.e. combing through for reviewers who often leave very similar reviews, or who have copied other reviewers almost verbatim, indicating some sort of collusion/purchased reviews). I do not think you are alone in recognizing that most people only discuss what they hate or what they love, and have developed critical analysis skills to comprehend how humans act on the internet.

However, something with a thousand unique positive or negative reviews that walk through the features liked/disliked by those people is more helpful than me looking at a small sample of something by itself. That's still good, and for books I do of course peruse the first pages if possible, but I know I've been burnt bad by that before. Nothing is entirely foolproof in the realm of personal tastes, but usually reading what people love and what people hate gives a decent understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of a product.

I appreciate your good intentions but I think I'll take your advice of trusting no one by preferring my own methods to yours! :) I look forward to any wary reviews you may also provide.

[Aaron]

Amazon reviews I generally find pretty worthless (1 star the product broke), but stuff like Steam Reviews, and Goodreads, I follow certain people and go ohh hey these 2-3 people all really like this even though I'm iffy I think I'll go for it, because these people have very similar tastes. The main problem is people vastly Overrate things, especially on GR who I feel tried to skew it down lower by trying to make a 2 okay.

[Steven]

Allison,
Whatever works for you! You make an important point in your next to last paragraph: generally speaking, we're taught in elementary statistics that with enough samples, the law of large numbers takes over and makes the mean and standard deviation reliable (of course, Amazon only quotes the mean). There are two gotchas there: First, not all distributions are Gaussian, so they don't obey the law of large numbers. Second, when the samples are biased, the mean and standard deviation, if they exist, reflect that and become meaningless unless you determine the bias.
Aaron,
A 1-5 ranking system is almost always interpreted differently by different people, which makes some sites' requirements of so many 4-5 star reviews on Amazon absurd right from the start, extra-absurd when they're all biased either upwards or downwards, and extra-extra-absurd when you consider the vicious circle implied (an author with a new book won't have any reviews for that book!). I won't name names here.
On Bookpleasures, we don't use rankings. In general we just say what we like or dislike about a book and why, although I'll admit getting a wee bit technical and/or climbing on my soapbox at times--for example, cliffhangers, or a book in a series that can't be read independently.
r/Steve

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

Hi all, I was interested in talking more about reviews/rating systems so instead of overwhelm this thread with something a little out of its scope, I started another thread here:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...