The Next Best Book Club discussion
Revive a Dead Thread
>
What you look for in a review...
date
newest »
newest »
When I first signed up on GR I didn't write reviews because I felt like it was a waste of time. Now I really enjoy having my thoughts of different books to look back on. Also, now that I have some pretty good friends around here, I always look to their opinions on books I'm going to read and they factor largely into whether or not I pick something up...so I like to think the same applies to me. :)I agree with Dan...if someone goes out of their way just to look funny, or to amaze us with their "intelligence", I pay no attention to their reviews. It makes them look UNintelligent, so why would I want their opinion anyway? And I too love reviews where the person felt a personal connection to the book.
Usually if I'm looking up a new book, I decide to read it based mostly on reviews of my GR friends, if they're available. Those are the opinions I trust the most. If they aren't, I start looking at the overall book rating or reviews of other people. Once I'm already reading a book (or already have) I glance over the reviews of everyone else.
Wow Dan. I agree with just about everything that you said. I didn't start out writing reviews at all, because I had no idea what to say or anything. I don't really consider myself to be an "analytical reader" although apparently some of my GR friends disagree with that, now.
At the beginning of the year, I gave myself the challenge of writing a review for every book that I read for the year. Some are better than others, obviously, but they are all written for me. I enjoy when others read them and like them, but, when I think back, they are ultimately my thoughts and feelings about what touched me, or failed to touch me, in a given book.
I hardly ever, now that I think about it, recap plot points, or go into the story at all. The only times that I have done this are with series books, just to give some frame of reference to my thoughts on a particular occurence or event, etc. But even then, it's more of the event that spawned the thought, rather than a full retelling of the story in the review.
I don't really appreciate those kinds of reviews, actually. One of my GR friends writes WONDERFUL reviews that I absolutely love to read, but they recap the story in great detail, and I always skip those parts. I think that the reason for me is twofold. One, I don't want the story spoiled, so I try to avoid knowing what happens at all costs -- this extends even to avoiding movie adaptations before reading the book. Two, I don't want MY interpretation of the book to be tainted by someone telling me what they picked out. I like to enjoy the story for the story without thinking "Oh, this must be the part where...".
Sorry to be so long winded... I've never really given a lot of thought to reviews in this way before. And now I'm interested in it.
The short answer is very similar to Dan's. I want to know what affected a person in a given book. I write my reviews with an oblivious (until now) eye to how a book affected ME. Those are the reviews I really enjoy.
Dan, I agree with you so much about what you want out of a review, and I attempt to do that in mine. I've always done reviews but I once I made some good friends here I tried a little harder. I know that some of my reviews end up being a little short, but I'm okay with that.
I am HORRIBLE at writing reviews. When I do write an actual review, it's mostly just quick notes about parts I liked and/or quotes that I want to remember. I never go into plot detail. I agree with you guys, I enjoy seeing friends' reviews that tell how the story affected them rather than what the actual story is about.
Jessica wrote: "I am HORRIBLE at writing reviews. When I do write an actual review, it's mostly just notes about parts I liked and/or quotes that I want to remember. I never go into plot detail. I agree with yo..."Jessica, have you read any of mine? They are exactly like you just described. Notes, parts I liked or disliked, etc.
I guess I'm kind of hypocritical in the reviewing aspect because I always like to look through reviews before I read a book to get an idea of how people felt a book. I'm usually drawn to the somewhat longer reviews that highlight certain aspects of the book, what was good/bad, how the book affected them, etc. However, most of my reviews tend to be just a sentence or two with a little blurb from my head about how I felt at the time I was finished with the book.I just hope that others continue to write good reviews on GR because I can never bring myself to write a really heartfelt or outspoken review.
I love your reviews, Becky! I wish I could write as well as you do! You always give such great descriptions on how the book made you feel (like or dislike). I'm lucky if I can type out a few coherent words about the book, or sometimes I just go WAY off topic! :)
Mod
So many great points have been made.
Me, personally, I think recapping the plot gets a bit redundant. I, like Jessica, will post a quote or two that really grabbed me... and then I will spend my time talking about what worked for me, and what didnt. What I thought as I went through it....
I go with the flow and don't worry too much about how it comes off. The reviewers who are out there to philosphize the whole book, and break it up and chew on it and then spit it out tend to glaze my eyes over.
I really dislike reviewers who spoil part of the book with out marking the review as a spoiler, because they know less people will look at it if they did....
Lori wrote: "I go with the flow and don't worry too much about how it comes off. The reviewers who are out there to philosphize the whole book, and break it up and chew on it and then spit it out tend to glaze my eyes over.I really dislike reviewers who spoil part of the book with out marking the review as a spoiler, because they know less people will look at it if they did...."
I don't like the people who have to analyze every word of a book either. I just want to know if the story was good.
And I do tend to not mark my reviews with the spoiler warning. But I am super careful to mark the spoilers when they appear in the review.
I am one of those people who won't look at a spoiler review at all, so I'm sure that I miss all of the other possibly great stuff that the person wrote about, and could read AROUND, except I don't want to risk the spoiler being right up front: FLUFFY DIES!
*sigh* I hope one day for the ability to hide spoilers in the text like IMDB does... with a rollover option to show it.
Typically when I write a review, I do a paragraph about the book's premise, as I think it is important to include. Granted, I don't believe the whole review should be a blow by blow description, that's what reading the book is for. I enjoy reviews which are honest. I like when someone has the balls to say they disliked a book which everyone loved. I also like it when someone is able to say they love a book which everyone seems to hate. I also love when reviews are well-written. I would definately say Becky's reviews are a good example of well-written.
When I write reviews, I try to put a piece of myself in them, as I feel every thing that I read helps me to discover a little bit more about myself. (egocentric, nahhh). I also admit to trying to be humorous in some of my reviews, but it's something I can't really help.
haha April, its okay for you to be funny :) you aren't obnoxious!
April, I think that a paragraph about the book is fine, but when people do the point-by-point recap of everything, I just think that it's pointless. (Haha! I made a funny! :P)I like when people make the review relevant to themselves, too, like you do April. I like your reviews. :)
I usually just review books here on GR, or sometimes on my blog (last year I reviewed every book I read on it, as a project).The things I might mention are my reaction to reading it, why I was disappointed if I had been looking forward to it; just my visceral reaction, I guess.
My longer reviews tend to be of the books I was looking forward to, that disappointed me.
I always try to mark for spoilers if I think it's necessary. I don't think it usually is, with mine.
My reviews are usually short.
I review every book. Really, though, the reviews are mostly just for me to refer back on, because honestly 3 years after a book I sometimes can't remember it at all. So some of my goodreads books don't have reviews--that's because I added them after joining gr and can't remember enough to review it fairly or even at all. My read books without stars--same thing!I do sometimes read reviews about books I have found mentioned elsewhere--in threads, in the newspaper, in a magazine--to see what people have to say. If I think a review sounds intelligent, I will do a "compare books" with the person who wrote it to see how we compare.
I HATE HATE HATE spoilers. That's just mean. I have tried reviewing some books that are hard to review without introducing spoilers. I just say that. I appreciate when people "hide because of spoilers"--and I have never ever read one of those reviews.
I honestly have no clue if anyone has ever read any of my reviews! Besides me, of course :)
I also review book--usually in a much shorter form--in Visual Bookshelf on facebook. Some of my cousins and friends read those, but we have similar taste, so we're really just looking for recommendations from people we trust, not reviews. I have no interest in linking my goodreads to facebook, which I know can be done.
I write reviews primarily for myself - I wrote them for years before I joined GR - but I love it when someone clicks they liked it. Big thrill that one although I sometimes don't discover it for months as I don't reread reviews usually and don't have notifications set up to email me. (And yes, I do click 'like' on other people's reviews). What I don't like in a review and it really pisses me off that at least one of the top two reviewers on the Best Reviews list does it, is to write a synopsis (often directly derived from the one on Amazon or the book cover) and then add a few lines of what they thought and never bother clicking 'spoiler'. I also think that a review that consists of 95% plot synopsis is not a review at all, let alone a Best Review.
What I like in a review varies. I don't mind intellectual show-offs, I quite enjoy ones written only to amuse, I just enjoy reading them.
When I am reading reviews to see if I ought to buy a book for my bookshop, then I look to see if people enjoyed the book and whether the book was a heavy or a lightweight read.
Dree - I have to check out Visual Bookshelf. I am unhappy about the Facebook Connection app. It seems that if a friend of a friend clicks on a book on FB that link takes them to GR where I had a detailed profile inc. a link to my website, and although you can protect your profile on FB you can't on GR. (I changed my profile).
April wrote: "Typically when I write a review, I do a paragraph about the book's premise, as I think it is important to include. Granted, I don't believe the whole review should be a blow by blow description, th..."I tend to skim over the premise a bit...I tend to talk more about broad themes that a person will find in a book. Besides, sometimes I feel like when I try to say something about the premise I just sound cheesy and hokey.
So many of you are people whose reviews I read and respect!At first I didn't write reviews because writing is a bit of a chore; and I'm lazy.
But I started to notice that the reason I come to Goodreads is discover people with similar taste; and to learn their opinions of books. So I began to read reviews (many of them written by some of you folks). I began to take advice from a few of you, and to value many of the reviews written by you.
So became clear to me that reviews were part of what makes Goodreads a valued site. And friends began to informally express interest in my views. I figured that taking the effort to write reviews was part of what we all "owe" this reading community. So now I write reviews of about 2/3 of the books I'm reading.
In a review, I try to express what the book was like to read and why I enjoyed it. If something I'm saying, or some position I'm taking is pointed enough, I feel I owe it to the reader (and the author) to explain why I'm taking that position--so maybe some critical essay writing is done.
I try not to spoil; but if what I'm trying to say seems to require a spoiler--I label the spoiler in advance. (I, personally, don't want to know that FLUFFY DIES until I get to that part of the book; so I try to keep that secret.) But sometimes a plot development confuses me, disgusts me, or moves me deeply and needs expression--so I'll spoil, but label in advance.
And thank you all for the reviews you've taken time to write.
This is probably the best thread I have read on goodreads. I have thought about every single comment. And been poking around in your reviews! And I am learning things about myself.--I am MUCH more touchy about spoilers than some of you. When I say spoiler, I mean I don't want to know anything that happens. Poking around, I found what I consider spoilers all over the place. What do YOU consider a spoiler?
--I just won't read an entire long review because it is likely to tell me more than I want to know about the content of the book. See above :)
--I really want to know WHY someone gave something 1 star or 5 stars or whatever.
--I don't want to know how a book made someone FEEL. I want to know what it made them THINK about. And now I realize I don't do this well in my reviews. Often because it's too hard to do it without what I consider spoilers (even though now I realize not everyone considers basic plot lines spoilers). All of my 5-star books are books that made me THINK. I don't mean in a snooty philosophical way, I just mean about life as it is or could be or thankfully isn't, basically.
--I don't like intellectual reviews, they make me feel stupid. Same with intellectual books :) And intellectual people (e.g.: if someone says "Goethe" in a sentence my brain turns off).
--If I read a review that I like (I rarely read reviews of books I have read), I ALWAYS "compare books" with the author, to get a better feel of how our tastes compare.
--If people hand out 5 stars willy nilly, I don't care what their review says.
--I don't hit "like" often enough, because I won't "like" it til I have read the book, and I don't go back. I need to think about this some more.
Dree, those are some very interesting points.I consider myself to be pretty strict with what I consider to be a spoiler. I think that anything that will cause me to have preconceived notions about a book is a spoiler. That's pretty broad. But it's hard to narrow down to quantifiable values.
Here are some examples though: 1) I don't want to know who lives or who dies, unless that death happens less than 2 chapters in and is the catalyst for the rest of the story.
2) I don't want to know about relationships. Going through the awkward period of "is she?", "does he?" with the characters is important and wonderful to me. In MOST cases.
3) I don't want to know of name changes (IE, in the case of marriage) or of status changes, or of life changes.
I think a lot of what irks me about spoilers is that I really try to empathize with and invest a lot in the characters I'm reading about, and when I learn something about them before I should, it ruins the feeling of camaraderie or kinship or whatever that I could have had. It makes me view the book differently, with expectant dread, or expectant excitement, or in some extreme cases, it might ruin all expectation for me, and make me not want to read it at all.
Moving on to your next point, I think that I've acquired a pretty good skill in being able to read around spoilers and plot discussion. But I will not open a review that is marked spoiler using the check-box GR provides, because again, there's no telling where that spoiler may appear in the review.
For your third point, I think that the differences between what I FEEL and what I THINK are very small. When I say that a book touched me, and made me cry, or made me happy to be human, or made me thankful to be who I am, that's because it made me think of all of the counterpoints to those things that could be my experience or the experience of the character or the experience of the world. I don't think that feelings arise without thoughts guiding them into existence.
Granted, a lot of times, I don't know how to express what I think about to make me feel a certain way in words, and even if I did, I think it would be near impossible for me to do it without spoiling it for someone else. And, going back to my other thought, I don't want someone else's thoughts or feelings to influence my own, so I try to avoid writing something that might plant a seed and make someone feel something they wouldn't otherwise. I want to write what I feel/think, but write it in such a way so as to be a little vague and not give too much emphasis to something that I hope others will experience on their own.
I don't really mind if people give out a lot of 5 star ratings, and here's why: One of my friends on here has this habit of starting a TON of books, but only finishing the great ones. She tends to give out a lot of 5 star reviews because of this. So, it's not that she is lenient in her rankings, she just doesn't read a lot of the books that she doesn't feel are 5 star material.
And I love "liking" reviews. I love reading reviews of the books that I've read, and sometimes will go through and compare points to see what others have picked out that I didn't. On the flip side, I try to avoid reading reviews of books that I haven't read because I don't want to be spoiled.
Ok, this is probably really long now. :)
Part of answering this comes from why you're reading the review in the first place. That said, I'm usually looking at reviews only when I'm "shopping" for books to add to my tbr. Coming at it from that point of view, I usually look at reviews to find out why someone disliked a book, and that's it.The blurb at the top gives me a quick premise, so I don't need another summary, and it's enough for me to decide if it's a type of story that I'd like. From there, I just scan the reviews and see if they're pretty uniform or if they're uniformly all over the place. Either way, I only check out low star reviews to see if those few people who disliked the story are bugged by the same things that would bug me.
On the other hand, if I'm looking to read positive reviews, it's usually because I want to see what a specific person's opinion is on a book that I'm already interested in. From this purpose, the biggest thing I'm looking for is substantiated opinions. Tell me anything about the book. Just make sure to explain why.
I usually look to see if the book drags, I can't stand that. I'll read a bad book, though, because I love camp.I usually put something I thought was funny in a review, since I won't be able to say anything constructive. I'm not that intelligent.
I find it harder to write a review for a book that I love than a book that I hate. I love to rip into one I don't like (I know, I shouldn't criticize but it's hard not to). I usually look for reviews that give a good overview without giving spoilers.
Oh, Grace, absolutely! Its so much easier to enumerate what we dislike than try to explain what we do, isn't it? I'm the same way, which is why I haven't written reviews for a lot of my favorite books. I love them, but it's hard to say WHY in a way that others will understand or appreciate...
I know what you mean. When I try to do a review for a book that I love I usually end up ith something like this. "I really loved it!"
whether or not the person actually liked it. THEN I want to know why... specifically, why. Example:
Overall I liked The Picture of Dorian Gray. The first half of the book was a bit tedious because Wilde seemed to use these long speeches and dialogue to establish characterization. However I stuck with it and the second half is full of dark twists, drugs and crime (that I won't ruin here) and we find out why the painting of Dorian is so grotesque. Stick through the first half and you'll be enthralled by the second.
Boom... review. There you go.
I don't really see the point in reviews anymore, theres such a wealth of opinion out there that 1 opinion alone seems fairly worthless.I choose books largely on their general reputation and wether or not the synopsis sounds promising.
I've written a few reviews here on GR. I always rate the books I've read on the star system but I generally write a review only if the book has moved me enough (in either direction) to want to record my impressions or opinions. Some of my reviews are brief - usually the ones where I express why I thought the book sucked - but if I gained some new insights or became emotionally connected to the book in some way I will be more wordy in my discussions. Sometimes the purpose of my writing a review is nothing more than to elicit a response from someone so I can get a different perspective on some aspect of the book that I found interesting or troubling.
I like reviews that give me some indication that the reviewers connected with the book (positively or negatively) in such a way that it changed them or changed their outlook on some aspect of their lives. Eloquence in stating that connection isn't as important to me as is recognizing in the review their desire to express that connection.
Reviewers whose sole aim is to impress others with their intelligence and/or education get no attention or credit from me. If I'm contemplating starting a book I will look for ratings or reviews by certain friends here with whom I know from experience that I share similar interests and tastes.