The Mookse and the Gripes discussion
General Non-Book Discussions
>
Café Quito: 'pub' thread for general discussions
I know my rating system changed over time. I use to rarely give 5 stars, then I became more generous and felt that 3 stars was a lowish grade, now I’m back to the GR rating system which is:5-it was amazing
4-really liked it
3- liked it
2-it was ok
1-did not like it
I would recommend 3 star books, but 2 stars aren’t really even ok for me, mostly they are kinda ok, I liked it just enough to finish it, but wouldn’t recommend it. 5 stars now means it hit every chord for me.
David, you are a tough customer, only 9% merit 5 stars from you.
WndyJW wrote: "David, you are a tough customer, only 9% merit 5 stars from you."I've been trying to be more selective with my 5 stars but unfortunately that leads to a big range in my 4 stars.
My average rating is 3.44.5 stars: 12% -- loved, loved it or it made a strong impression
4 stars: 34% -- very good, pretty wowed by it or it expanded my world
3 stars: 42% -- good to quite good (but I may not remember it long-term)
2 stars: 8% -- meh
1 stars: 2% -- didn't like (probably skewed a bit as I often abandon books I don't like; I don't rate ones I don't finish)
I definitely give too many 4s nowadays - although that's in part as anything less than 4 seems to count as 'below average' on Goodreads and I am very conscious with small press books in particular that I need a good reason - i.e. a particular flaw - to give it a 3.Similarly on GR 1* pretty much counts as 'wish I'd never opened the cover / hated it / waste of paper' etc - I find when I rate books 1* I often get snarky comments from people who like it
My current approach is to rate each year's books as:
5* 8%
4* 47%
3* 31%
2* 12%
1* 2%
and I moderate ratings accordingly (i.e increase/reduce ratings if needed)
But overall on GR I have:
5* 7%
4* 38%
3* 33%
2* 13%
1* 6%
which shows how my pre GR ratings, which used a similar system, tended to be lower.
I also rank all books in a year - so I can actually see whether a book is upper quartile or above average, irrespective of the score. When I compare books from different years - e.g. for best ever Booker winners / Goldsmiths shortlists etc - it's the %ile ranking I use, not the rating.
Paul wrote: "I definitely give too many 4s nowadays - although that's in part as anything less than 4 seems to count as 'below average' on Goodreads and I am very conscious with small press books in particular that I need a good reason - i.e. a particular flaw - to give it a 3."I find myself doing something similar.
(Which is too bad because by my rating, a 3 is a very good book. I realize many on GR do not agree & a 3 is often seen as "lesser".)
Yes pre Goodreads, 3 was my default for a good, enjoyable book. 4 was really good (e.g. I'd likely seek out another by same author, or automatically read their next book) and 5 was pretty much book of the year.
Even 2 was OK and 1 wasn't dreadful, just not for me (I actually had 0 for the truly bad).
Half stars would be helpful. I'm sure I'm not the first person to say that.
Yes, .5 would be useful, as would the time consuming ratings on prose, character, plot, originality, etc., but who has time for that?My 3, 4, 5 star ratings were also impacted by the few groups I’ve been in over the decade I’ve been on Shelfari then GR. When I was in a generous group my ratings became more generous. In the last few years I’ve read more popular books which I liked, but didn’t think were as good as say Drndic, Sebald, or the Fitzcarraldo, Peirene Press type books, or Anita Brookner, Penelope Fitzgerald, the nyrb older classics, so I needed to revisit my ratings and assign a lot more 3 stars and save 4 and 5 for the truly well written novels.
I think I tagged one book DNF, but it was older. I don’t write reviews for books I don’t like because I don’t want to dissuade readers who might like the book (which important because I’m hugely influential in the book world) and I don’t want to mean. I don’t review every book I like though, sometimes I feel like it, sometimes I don’t and really nobody really cares what Wendy Whidden from Cleveland thought about a book.
WndyJW wrote: "nobody really cares what Wendy Whidden from Cleveland thought about a book."Oh, you are very much wrong about that, Wendy! I, for one, read your reviews and I'm sure others (at least from this forum) too.
Mod
1942 ratings (3.96 avg)
5* - 19% (387)
4* - 59% (1146)
3* - 18% (365)
2* - 2% (40)
1* - 0% (4)
5* 14%4* 39%
3* 30%
2* 11%
1* 4%
From 1649 books
You’re very kind, Vesna, and I do care about reviews by members of this group.
5* - 22%4* - 47%
3* - 25%
2* - 4%
1* - 0%
from 2865 books
5* 18% (111)4* 35% (215)
3* 35% (217)
2* 8% (52)
1* 1% (10)
Need to make sure my next two reads are 4*.
Not many groups of people I’d feel like an underachiever in for having “only “ 600 books!
600 is nothing to be ashamed of, Lee. It’s still August.
600 books read is more than most Americans and lots go into those numbers-how long has one been tracking books read on here, our age, do we still have young kids in the house, are we still working, do we favor shorter books or long books, easy reads or denser novels, and just how crazy life gets. Last year I had read 66 books by July 31, this year I had read 33, exactly half as many. And there’s number of books read, number of books rated, number of books reviewed. Probably the most important number should be how many books do you remember reading? :)
On the remember reading challenge I don’t score well. I couldn’t usually tell you what book I read last (sometimes not even what book I am reading now)!
Same here. I think that’s the downside of being an avid reader, the books start to blur together.
Condolences on the death of your Queen, British friends. Sincerely, I liked Queen Elizabeth, not as much as my mother who was in tears when I called her.
Same sentiments. If I'm not mistaken you'll be having kings for quite a while now.
I realize there are a range of emotions today and I'll echo the condolences as well.
Thanks Wendy/David/Robert for your considered thoughts.
Probably obvious but I'm not a monarchist even so it does feel strange, the Queen was quite an iconic figure, and part of an era in which royalty still had some sort of aura of mystery, unlike now. Can't imagine Charles will have the same impact, although his support for the environment is a positive thing. I just wish more elderly people had access to the kind of support and dedicated healthcare she enjoyed in her final years.
Agreed, Alwynne. She was indeed iconic and it's hard to fathom the sense of loss many are feeling tonight.Sometimes awkward humor at a time of loss is an attempt to lift spirits but can come across disrespectful online. I hope this continues to be a place of support for all of us.
Very well expressed David.
Sending my condolences, as well. I'm sure the past year was difficult for the Queen, especially after losing her husband after 70+ years of marriage.
I have no quarrel with the Queen, she was born to that life, she accepted that she had a duty and she did what she thought was right. There are long discussions to be had about privilege and imperialism, etc., but not today. I’m glad she went peacefully with her hopefully her family around her.Knowing how many are against the monarchy I was really surprised at the size of the crowds during her jubilee celebrations. She was still a beloved figure.
You’re right, Robert, unless William or young George abdicates it will be kings for the next 3 generations. Which could happen. If not for her uncle’s abdication to marry a divorced woman there wouldn’t have been a Queen Elizabeth.
I'm not British but I confess that when I heard the news (via a BBC News alert) I started to sob at work and had to take a moment. I feel your loss and am told that President Biden has ordered all Federal flags to fly at half-mast and urged Governors to do the same for State flags (the Governor of my state, Connecticut, has already made the order).
David wrote: "Agreed, Alwynne. She was indeed iconic and it's hard to fathom the sense of loss many are feeling tonight.Sometimes awkward humor at a time of loss is an attempt to lift spirits but can come acro..."
Sorry David was that directed at me, if so, it was too vague for me to grasp your point, I wasn't aware of trying to be humorous in any sense. And I think it's worth being aware that attitudes towards the royal family are not the same across the board here, particularly after the racism highlighted by the response to Meghan, the situation with Prince Andrew etc
I watched the news programs this afternoon. I feel like watching the movie The Queen with Helen Mirren. It’s remarkable that Elizabeth became queen at such a young age.
Alwynne wrote: "Sorry David was that directed at me"Not at all. It was in reference to a post I made but deleted. Sorry to be cryptic. I was trying to apologize without belaboring.
David wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "Sorry David was that directed at me"Not at all. It was in reference to a post I made but deleted. Sorry to be cryptic. I was trying to apologize without belaboring."
I doubt many Brits would be offended, as a society we don't tend to be that sentimental about these things, and for ethnic-minority communities attitudes towards the royal family are less than positive these days. Apart from Meghan and the failure to defend her adequately from racist critics and white nationalists, there have been issues about lack of proper recognition of the role of funds from slavery in propping up the monarchy, around lack of diversity in hiring - including policies that until the 1960s actively excluded people of colour from positions related to it, etc. So, as much ambivalence or indifference as active grief. Although I think the Queen the most liked or least disliked of the family.
One of the commentators today, a young woman of color was talking to Lester Holt, a Black news anchor, and as she expressed some fondness for the Queen she said her feelings about the Queen would make some of our ancestors very uncomfortable or that their ancestors would find her feelings surprising. I don’t remember her exact words, but I knew that she was acknowledging the shared history of exploitation of Black people by the US and UK, both countries amassing great wealth from the Atlantic slave trade. I think it is one of the more commendable traits of human beings that at times like this, when a national figure with a complex history dies, we can put aside the negative aspects of that person just for a day or so to acknowledge their humanity and the loss their family feels. As Alwynne said, Elizabeth was an iconic figure and her loss is being felt by many.
I was a bit confused too, David, but I guessed you might have deleted something!
My life span and the Queen's reign were the same until today. Upon learning of her death, like Cindy, I cried. I had my husband lower our flag to half mask in her honor and then heard than President Biden had instructed the same be done at all federal buildings. While I am not British and not a monarchist, I do think Queen Elizabeth II was a good example of a servant-leader. May she rest in peace.
WndyJW wrote: "One of the commentators today, a young woman of color was talking to Lester Holt, a Black news anchor, and as she expressed some fondness for the Queen she said her feelings about the Queen would m..."I think you're just a much nicer person than me and most of the people I know, we've all been moaning about the endless coverage across the media, and for people with kids about childcare if things close for the funeral! And my friend's Gran was devastated that her favourite quiz show was cancelled.
My 84 yr old mother has also loved the Queen her whole life, ever since, at age 9, Mom got up at 4am to go across the street to the neighbor who had a television to watch the wedding of Elizabeth and Phillip. I remember being at a party when news broke that Diana had been killed, an Irish guy at the party (truly from Ireland and just visiting the states) was jubilant. At that time I didn’t understand the depth of the hatred the Irish had for the English. Even if I had I would have been taken aback by the guy’s reaction to the death of a young woman, a woman who left two kids without their mum.
I wouldn’t celebrate the death of Trump. I can’t say I’d be sorry, but I wouldn’t cheer and celebrate.
That wasn’t the reaction of most Irish people I don’t think, to be fair, there were very sympathetic scenes in Ireland when Diana died. And today even Sinn Fein issues condolences on the passing of the head of the British monarchy! And says they sympathize with the northern Unionist community’s sense of loss. It’s a long way from the bitter days of The Colony, though as Alwynne says there would be other emotions as well.
I saw an article of tweets offering condolences. The one that brought me to tears was from Paddington Bear: “Thank you, ma’am.”
Lee wrote: "That wasn’t the reaction of most Irish people I don’t think, to be fair, there were very sympathetic scenes in Ireland when Diana died. And today even Sinn Fein issues condolences on the passing of..."I agree, also not possible to generalise about the Irish, apart from Ireland versus Northern Ireland, not to mention the Irish disapora, there are religious differences, differing political or national affiliations.
Meanwhile England seems to have entered a time warp: parliament suspended until after the funeral; weddings postponed because of various closures;, sports and other events cancelled including charity matches; shops closing early or not opening; employees in various workplaces forced to wear black; Charles rather creepily referring to the queen as 'mama' like some Victorian throwback; comedy shows off the air on BBC channels; nothing but downbeat or melancholy music on radio stations punctuated by the national anthem. All seems very out of step with the world in 2022.
I saw a wise post on Instagram that said, “There are many mixed emotions today, be gentle with each other” I think that is good advise. I completely understand Alwynne and others who feel the death of a living symbol of colonialism, oppression, and the hoarding of vast wealth while other starve ought not to be held up as a loss to anyone other than her loved ones, but I also understand the loss of those who enjoyed the pageantry, rituals, and traditions, or who, like my mother (a middle class White woman,) has admired the Queen from afar for her grace and her devotion to duty for most of their life.
WndyJW wrote: "I saw a wise post on Instagram that said, “There are many mixed emotions today, be gentle with each other” I think that is good advise. I completely understand Alwynne and others who feel the death..."I'm more bothered about how triggering some of this emphasis on the downbeat is, there are a lot of people grieving losses from Covid still and I think it's not that healthy for them. A friend who lost a close relative and wasn't allowed to see them as their care home was closed off, is finding it all very upsetting. Her relative was one of the 'bodies' the government was happy to let 'pile high' and she feels very upset that there's been no real reckoning about that. Also, a very negative form of mourning being rolled out/emphasized here, rather than being framed as a celebration of a life. And if anyone had a good life and a good death it was the queen.
Completely agree, Alwynne. I didn’t realize it was so tragic over there. She was 96 for god’s sake!
Emily wrote: "Completely agree, Alwynne. I didn’t realize it was so tragic over there. She was 96 for god’s sake!"I know! And not stuck in a crappy care home, no long painful deterioration, or dying in a hospital corridor or while waiting for over 9 hours for an ambulance as happened to a friend's uncle recently. Instead, the best of medical care, surrounded by family in a place she apparently loved. This form of forced, gloom-ridden, national mourning' is actually starting to feel quite oppressive/totalitarian, and days of it to come still.
I have not been following the coverage, but I was also kind of surprised by the somberness of it all even at a distance. I mean, 96 is a long time to live and it would seem she did have a good life (as Alwynne said). In a world that seems to be changing ever more quickly, she must have seemed like a constant in many people's lives.
You can appreciate a long life well lived and still feel a deep sad sense of loss. Also, it's truly the end of an era, and I think for many people who have never known another monarch, it's a significant shift and blow.
Cindy wrote: "You can appreciate a long life well lived and still feel a deep sad sense of loss. Also, it's truly the end of an era, and I think for many people who have never known another monarch, it's a signi..."Well yes and no, she had no real political power, she was a figurehead, whose relevance for many was probably more in terms of attracting tourist revenue - that was the argument for continuing to pour funds into the royal household. And there is surely a way of people who want to mourn being able to do so without it disrupting everyone's lives. The parliament issue for example may make bringing down the prices for energy - already crippling a lot of families - in time for the October deadline quite tricky, plus we have already been without any effective government here for months.
Also, with all due respect, I'm not sure it's appropriate for those who aren't actually based here - or even British - to attempt to direct the reactions of those of us who are.
The Mookse and the Gripes
Books mentioned in this topic
Woman in Blue (other topics)The Others (other topics)
How I Came to Know Fish (other topics)
The Mussel Feast (other topics)
Winterberg's Last Journey (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Margarita Liberaki (other topics)Ota Pavel (other topics)
Raül Garrigasait (other topics)
Birgit Vanderbeke (other topics)
Jaroslav Rudiš (other topics)
More...
4: 39%
3: 35%
2: 15%
1: 2%