Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
Bulletin Board
>
Bad Reviews and the Star Rating System
Ah, a subject near and dear to my heart. I have been reviewing books for more than 10 years. I get them from authors, author-friends, publishers, libraries and new and used book stores. I spend a lot of time on the review. If I don't like the book, I merely summarize the review. If I like it, I gush and tell why I like it, etc. I have been on GoodReads for a little over a year and generally get about a book a month to review - most are self-published. And, sorry, but some are not good books - good stories, perhaps, for the family of the author. As a matter of fact, I still haven't written a couple of GR reviews yet - one, because it was so run-of-the-mill.Some reviewers review poor books with their feet - they simply don't. I do.
I also give 2 starts and mostly 4 stars. I rarely give a 5-star.
I read with a highlighter and if there are too many typos or errors or a huge one, I mention it. If only a few, I don't mention it. I also generally try to find something 'wrong' with each book even if it is only that the chapters were too few and too long or that an index would help or I would have liked more illustrations.
I have written the publisher with errors I found but don't do it anymore. A couple have thanked me. One was rude and those errors were huge but the author is big.
So, I guess that's enough of miscellaneous tidbits from me!
I sometimes wonder if reviewers let the process go to their heads too much. This isn't directed at anyone in particular. Most of the reviewers I've been fortunate enough to have come into contact with have been very fair in their comments, which I appreciate. It takes a certain amount of skill to sift through what's good (subjective, I know) and pick apart what they like/don'tlike.Having said that, I have seen reviewers post up stuff to the effect that they know what's best and know more than the person who wrote the novel. Maybe that's true...but the tone came off as more than a little arrogant to me. Just my opinion on all this...in the end, it's an opinion, and if it's constructive advice, then I take it, move on, and try to do better the next time around.
Skye wrote: "Ah, a subject near and dear to my heart. I have been reviewing books for more than 10 years. I get them from authors, author-friends, publishers, libraries and new and used book stores. I spend a l..."I'm an ordinary reader but I do review most of the books. I agreed with everything you said until I got to the bit about rarely giving five stars. I don't if I find plot flaws - that couldn't happen that way cos he can't drive - sort of thing - characters that start off okay but go a bit wooden - speech that sounds too young, old, posh or whatever from that person - but I find loads of books that aren't like that.
I don't see why you deliberately look for a reason to criticise. I couldn't write a book but if I did somebody like you saying it wasn't good enough for a silly reason would upset me. A GOOD reason would be different cos I'd learn from it and write the next book better - No book is PERFECT but 5 stars doesn't mean that - it means you enjoyed it and other people who like that sort of book probably will too.
Jesse wrote: "I sometimes wonder if reviewers let the process go to their heads too much. This isn't directed at anyone in particular. Most of the reviewers I've been fortunate enough to have come into contact w..."That's what I was trying to say only you put it better - anybody can learn from constructive criticism - I do at work - but deliberating looking for faults is just showing-off.
A.L. wrote: "I've bought books on the basis of low reviews - one in particular where the reader thought it was a novel and in fact it was non-fiction and clearly stated. I've bought books with high ratings and ..."I joined Goodreads to find new authors - I read a lot and sometimes bestsellers you find easily aren't that good - I've found quite a lot that only have one or two books published and some of them are really good - yes that is just my opinion - that's what reviews are - one reader's opinion - If I enjoy a book I rate it 5 stars whether the author is well-known or not - I am picky but I don't LOOK for faults - I read to relax after work - or in my lunch break now I've got a Kindle.
Zara-jo brought up a good point. She said that she was picky but didn't look for faults (paraphrased). As a casual, non-judgmental reader and occasional reviewer, I don't, either, yet subconsciously, I do pick up on things that may not fit or definitely don't fit and they come to the forefront of my brain later on. I'll still more than likely enjoy the book. Reviewers, OTOH, will consciously look for faults. That's neither good nor bad. That's just being critical.Again, having said that (and I use that phrase a lot--gotta watch it) there can be a time when reviewers can be overly critical and harp on the littlest of things. Is that too much? Maybe. I feel that if the criticism is warranted, take it, move on, do a better job next time.
If I ever get into the 'popular' realm like Stephen King or J.K. Rowling (highly doubtful) and my books sell in the millions, then maybe I'll dismiss some of the comments tossed my way. Maybe...but I think that I'd still want to improve to the point where no one could ever find fault with what I write. A dream--yes. But to me it's a dream worth working towards.
Jesse mentions reviewers' power going to their heads, and I think there is much evidence to support that idea. Many reviewers are struggling or failed writers themselves, and now they are in a position to judge in minutes what took another writer months or more to create. It's like kids who wreck something when they're told to leave it alone--they're exercising the power they DO have out of frustration over not having the power they WISH they had, to create.I am NOT saying this is the majority, but I do think there are folks who review this way. It's helpful to the writer to be aware of this, I think, and know that at least they created a book.
(When Bob Dylan was heckled once in the 90s about his late output as opposed to his 60s music he replied to the heckler, "At least I'm still up on the stage trying.")
I hope I never get to the point where I can just dismiss or ignore criticism. There are many writers, King among them, I'd argue, who trashed their talent by writing flabby books because there was just no critic/editor they felt they had to listen to anymore, since obviously they were great writers because they sold lots of books. It doesn't mean one has to follow an editor blindly, or do what critics demand, but it means a writer is like everyone else, and needs to be aware that he doesn't go up his own, uh, reputation and go soft.
John wrote: "I hope I never get to the point where I can just dismiss or ignore criticism. There are many writers, King among them, I'd argue, who trashed their talent by writing flabby books because there was..."Like an actor you're only as good as your last performance - and that is just another reason to look for new authors - I still think picking out faults for the sake of it and not because the author really isn't that good is wrong - and cruel.
I still think picking out faults for the sake of it and not because the author really isn't that good is wrong - and cruel.No argument there. And it is the author who gets to decide in the end what to listen to and what to tune out.
I'd agree with Zara-jo in that you're only as good as your last novel/short story/poem/whatever. Look at the beating Rowling took when she tried something different than her Harry Potter stories. (Truthfully, I didn't care for her first novel in that genre, but she gave it her best shot and moved on to better things).As for some reviewers being cruel for picking on authors if their work isn't "good"--agreed...but that's the price you pay for putting what you do on display. That is how our society works. If I do critique a novel--I've done a few on this site as well as beta'd for people I know--I try to find something good about it.
However, what John said in his last post about the author getting to decide what to listen to as well as what to tune out, I'd agree, but I'd also qualify that statement by adding thatif the comments are the same (i.e. poor pacing, characterization, grammar, etc.) then the author should take those like-minded critiques and act upon them.
Steven wrote: "Sometimes I wish these sites would let us do the half a star thing but I guess that's just getting silly. I would go with what you suggest but part of me thinks in a way people are counting on my r..."BookLikes allows for half-stars in ratings.
I don't spend just minutes in writing a review. It takes a while to read the book and I literally spend hours on the review.I learned years ago in Toastmasters that one bad critique is something to take in stride. But if several people say the same thing, at different times, maybe I should consider the criticism.
Zara-jo wrote: "Skye wrote: "Ah, a subject near and dear to my heart. I have been reviewing books for more than 10 years. I get them from authors, author-friends, publishers, libraries and new and used book stores..."Zara - I think you made good points. Reviewing is person specific - I think. I do give five star ratings and I rarely give anything less than a three. If I read a bad book I generally do not review or rate it. That is because I am an author and I think the bad reviews should come from readers (that will mean more to the writer and should not be misconstrued in any way.) - at least I'd hope so.
Jacqueline wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Although this is not exactly on-topic, I have a policy in regards to giving reviews. If I consider a book of low-enough quality to give it a 1- or 2-star review, instead I contact th..."Jacqueline & Daniel, I appreciate your comments and whole heartedly agree. I have hesitated to personally contact other authors but I guess I should just "man-up" and do it. I would appreciate the same from a fellow author. My first book HOME BY CHRISTMAS has generally gotten good reviews (averaging about four stars) but one rating was posted at a one star - and no review. Well, I would like to hear personally what the reader felt so strongly about to rate it low - but honestly would prefer to hear it via personal communications, ie. email. enough said. Have a great week you'all. :o) Rory
I'm very careful with my private comments and usually only contact the author if I see other reviews that have the same criticisms and/or know that author is looking for feedback. I also try to offer solutions. If grammar and spelling is a problem, I suggest Beta readers since many new authors can't afford an editor (or maybe don't realize they're paying a bad one). Kindness is a must.I would never ask a reviewer to explain their rating,
Also, new reviewers sometimes get a 5star and a 1star mixed up. I have seen this on Amazon quite a bit, where other reviews give a low rating because the shipment was late!
Skye wrote: "Also, new reviewers sometimes get a 5star and a 1star mixed up. I have seen this on Amazon quite a bit, where other reviews give a low rating because the shipment was late! "I've had that happen a couple of times, too. When it happened to me on GR, I messaged that if they meant the one star, that was their right and opinion and I wouldn't dream of contesting it. I only questioned it because of the glowing review that followed. Both changed the stars with apologies. People are generally pretty nice about things like that.
Sadie wrote: "Re: sending private messages to authors rather than posting a public review. Perhaps I am in the minority, but I would be far more devastated by a stranger emailing me personally to tell me what ..."
Several years ago I contacted Harlan Cobin by email via his web site, it was in regard to his first book set in Far North Queensland, not an angry email, but I did complain about glaring inaccuracies. He replied, saying that due to all the similar complaints, he would no longer rely on the word of researchers
Lady Echo wrote: "Objection! "Any low rating should be accompanied with a justification"?
Um. NO. Sorry. But NO! It isn't the job of a paying reader to provide you with feedback."
I'm a reader, I want to know why you think the book is bad, just a star rating means nothing to a potential buyer or reader. It may simply be the reviewer dislikes graphic sex, or violence, something which may not bother others at all
"I'm a reader,I want to know why you think the book is bad, just a star rating means nothing to a potential buyer or reader. It may simply be the reviewer dislikes graphic sex, or violence,..."
You have a good and interesting point. You are right, it could be a difference of opinion. I try to leave at least a little review but there are books I have simply rated because I read them as a teenager or child and don't remember enough to give an actual review, just that I really enjoyed them (or not).
Some readers might not be comfortable enough with their own writing ability to leave a review or even know how to write one. They are just readers and we have to be careful not to penalize them for that.
IMHO, a star rating unaccompanied by an explanation is utterly useless to me as a reader. The whole point of the reader reviews is for a reader to see what a "regular" person like himself to have an informal chat with another "regular" person, as opposed to someone paid to review for a magazine, or something. (I won't get into that.)It seems that the reason reader reviews are valued is for a perceived lack of connection to The Industry, or because we don't trust someone being paid to write about a book. Well, as we see, these humble readers aren't pure on that count anymore than reviewers are (though I can't recall many cases of professional critics being fired for accepting money from an author for a review).
With the financial angle muddied, it seems to come down to a matter of the "regular" person not being one of those stuffy folks who actually went to school to gain a literary background. The vast amount of reader reviews I've read reveal honest and straightforward people who seem to enjoy having a platform for telling the world what they think of a book or product, where potentially many strangers will listen to their words. It seems to be the real point of the reviews, in many cases.
But the real value is for the potential customer who reads an intelligent, thoughtful review of a book no professional reviewer would ever critique, either because it is a genre novel or simply self-published. These reviewers are the counterpart to the good writers who never went to school for writing, and in both cases they reveal their skill and creativity for little return. To me they are the crucial element in getting a self-published book recognized. And to be perfectly blunt, no star-only review ever helped anyone except those who exclusively look at the star rankings and let them make their decision for them over their personal taste. I don't know anyone like that, but I suppose such folks exist.
Otherwise, if a person leaves just a star ranking, I assume that person didn't even read the book. Why go to the trouble of leaving a ranking if you can't even put down a few sentences on a book you just read? (All of this applies in spades to someone you're paying to give you feedback--that IS the job you're paying for, unless you're giving precious dollars to someone and only expect them to say "Two stars, where's my check?" I don't believe such writers exist.
Daniel wrote: "Unfortunately, I don't know how much impact this had. Sales remained about the same. But, I noticed she did not receive anymore negative reviews regarding the violence in the book."A review stating clearly that a book contained violence to a more than minimal amount would please me, I would not read it. Yet the same review would garner the interest of those who love a bit of violence. ( in their reading matter)
Just as a matter of interest, to me if nobody else, a couple of questions:1: would a badly spelled review with poor grammar affect your appreciation of the review?
One thing that rightly or wrongly biases my opinion is a spelling error I see all too often and that is loose instead of lose!
2: if you were asked, is there, in your opinion, a difference between a book reviewer and a book critic?
Bec wrote:"Bec,
Spelling errors alarm me, and knock me out of the reading I'm doing. I know my book has some, but when I learn about ones I missed I correct them and reload the whole thing.
A reviewer is someone like the horrible one in my city's major newspaper, who spends 90% of the review giving a plot rundown, then has a paragraph that usually comments on the "strong female main character" and whether he liked the book. I think of Entertainment Weekly as a place of reviewers. I don't think there's much wrong with that, but it is consumer-oriented, towards folks who just want to know if "ET liked it" or not.
A book critic is about literary analysis, and to me is far more useful to a writer or to a reader who thinks about books and doesn't just consume them.
Reviewers tend to look at what's popular. Critics tend to look at what is "literary." I'm not saying one is superior to the other, since I think what's popular usually isn't something I care to read, and what's considered literary is merely what critics think is superior, which I don't care about, either. But I do think there is a difference.
I'd have to agree with John on this point. I make no claim of using perfect grammar in my novels, but that's up to the writer as well as the editor (if you have the services of one) to detect any clunky phrases or errors. Spelling mistakes can and do happen, even with the big name writers although they have the services of (I guess) the best editors around. Punctuation errors can happen when the book is being printed, and yes, the writer is as much at fault here as is the editorial staff for not seeing those mistakes earlier and fixing them.To me, a critic is more valuable than a reviewer, mainly due to them actively looking for flaws and being far more critical (as the name implies) than a reviewer. With a critic's assessment of the work, the writer can get a better, somewhat more objective view of their weakness(es) and see what must be fixed. The only problem with critics is that some of them have impossibly high standards and if one falls short (in their eyes) then savagery may occur.
Still, reviewers do have a place in the grand scheme of things, as they tend to drive the book's popularity along. While that's no guarantee of success, it can be of help to the author to receive good reviews. I am grateful for the reviews I've gotten, and I'm also grateful that many of the reviewers took the time to look for flaws. Believe me, I'll work on my weaknesses. In the end, I feel that you need the input of both kinds of people.
Bec's first question was about spelling and grammar in a review, not the book.Whether it degrades a review kind of depends on the content of the review, but in general no it doesn't spoil a review in my mind. Reviews on amazon or GR or other such places are casual reviews, mostly written on an online form. People tend to spill their emotions out raw and hit Submit, never bothering to edit their review. It's about the same as an email.
However, if the reviewer goes on and on about how bad the spelling and grammar in the book is, and litters the same mistakes throughout their review...well, let's just say the irony is not lost on anyone with a modicum of writing competence.
"Their where ALOT of spelling and grammer misteaks in this book thats makes it read really bad."
Uh...sure, we'll just have to take your word for that!
LMAO! Micah, that example makes me wonder if the book that person reviewed might be fairly devoid of "misteaks."
Sometimes the review says more about the reviewer than it does about the book!
Looking for an honest, detailed review of your work?Check our review blog at-http://eokhardahreview.wordpress.com/
http://jayasreesown.wordpress.com/
Talented upcoming writers-we like to promote your work through review!
Contact us at
eokhardah@gmail.com
jayashreeroy007@gmailcom
deekakdwip@gmail.com
I think we need another word here! For someone between a critique and a quick reviewer. I have been reviewing a special category of books (with some branching out) for various publications for more than 10 years. Mine are not critiques but also not summaries or the kind of reviews found on Amazon, etc. As a matter of fact, I have very very few on Amazon because I detest giving stars. I sometimes write about style, character development and other 'literary' stuff but mostly I write about any magic (not magic tricks but magic writing - the 'you are there' kind). I like books that I will stay up late reading! and when I encounter then, I say so.
John wrote: "Bec wrote:"Skye wrote: "I think we need another word here!
I'd never thought much about it until now, but I think you two have given us good definitions and points. It seems to me that a critic evaluates the literate qualities of a work, citing voice, theme, and nuances of language, character and symbolism. They're looking at the qualities of the work as literature.
Reviewers, whether professional or amateur, use more 'popular' standards, evaluating the book more for its entertainment value. Were the plot and characters engaging? Did the writing make you 'feel' and 'see'. Did the story evoke an emotional response? Did you enjoy it? Anything that detracts from positive responses to those questions would be noted.
And while those star-only ratings may be frustrating for the author, reviews and ratings aren't meant for authors. Many readers use them as a measure of how enjoyable a book is and yes, its popularity. I may be wrong, but I think they see those stars as a shorthand for what a reviewer has already said in words.
As a reader I find star-ratings useless on their own, but as a summary of the review overall they flag whether a review is positive or negative. If a review has misspellings, I do take that seriously. If someone is going to give a verdict on a book that took months to write, he can damn well look over that review for a few seconds to make sure his few sentences are properly constructed. If the grammar in the review is off, I see no reason to take the person's opinion seriously. I'm sure most casual readers of reviews don't mind. I do.
Here we go again - authors telling readers how to review a book. It is very important reviewers follow the author's instructions (the stuff authors believe are important) or their reviews are useless and will be ignored. This from the same authors who depend on honest reviews to sell their books. (Sarcasm Font)Authors need to decide whether they want readers to honestly review their work or if they want to control the process. Authors cannot have both.
The path you are taking here is going to leave a bad taste in many readers' mouths and when reviews dwindle to the point there are very few (or none at all) - understand that situation is your own fault.
Readers are not writers and don't appreciate being told how inefficient they are. Of course they hate being laughed at too, and the inference they are obviously illiterate doesn't help either.
If the author is new to me, I generally read a sampling of reviews before purchasing and there are reviewers I look for because I know their tastes are similar to mine.As a writer, I take every review seriously, whether it is expertly or poorly written. These readers took the time to read my book and write their opinion and their opinions are important to me. Can I address every criticism? Of course not, but each book I've written has been better written than the one before it and that's largely due to what I've learned about my strengths and weaknesses through reviews.
I have no idea how long or what it takes to build a house. I can't build one, but I have a valid opinion on what style of house I like. Some readers may not know how to build a sentence or even a word, but that, to me anyway, doesn't make their opinion any less valid when it comes to the pleasure (or displeasure) they find in a book.
As I've said before, people review for all sorts of reasons and in all sorts of ways. A reader will like book A and dislike book B. The next reader might like book B and hate book A.There is no right or wrong, except honesty.
A.L. wrote: "As I've said before, people review for all sorts of reasons and in all sorts of ways. A reader will like book A and dislike book B. The next reader might like book B and hate book A.There is no r..."
Christine wrote: "Here we go again - authors telling readers how to review a book. It is very important reviewers follow the author's instructions (the stuff authors believe are important) or their reviews are usele..."
Well said!
I've bought books based on one star reviews and hated books with 5. Everyone is different, like different things and have different expectations.When I review it's usually based on how the book made me feel. If the story was great but it had a few typos then I'll overlook them. If the book was technically perfect but the plot was flat then I won't. For me the plot, worldbuilding and characterisation are important. Other people prefer different strengths. I rarely rate a book 1 star but that is a personal preference. Often because I can't explain why - I just didn't like it.
Another question about prices. I know if I get a free movie ticket, the movie doesn't have to be as good as if I paid for the ticket. Same with product reviews - same with books, kind of. I have no idea how the price of a book is set - anyone know? It seems that many self-published books are short and about $10. Good hardbacks are between $15 and $30. And, yes, it depends on the number of pages to a certain extent. But I have been getting books that are extremely short - maybe a poem with a word and picture on each page, or a sentence on each page. Maybe a softcover book that is very short. A few years ago, I told myself I would get a webpage and be ruthless - and give a value to each book. E.g., I would say if it is worth the price or not. I haven't done that, though! So, again, value is in the eyes of the beholder but i don't thin the price and number of pages is always enough for the prospective reader to decide.
Christine wrote: "Here we go again - authors telling readers how to review a book. It is very important reviewers follow the author's instructions (the stuff authors believe are important) or their reviews are usele..."I don't see authors telling readers how to review here, I see people answering questions and giving their opinions.
They were asked for those opinions.
Arrogance and condescension works both ways. You seem to have no problem with reviewers telling authors how to do well, absolutely everything, I conclude this from your promotion of a particular web site of a reviewer who, I might add, is yet another who knows not the difference between "losing" and "loosing"!
Skye wrote: "Another question about prices. I know if I get a free movie ticket, the movie doesn't have to be as good as if I paid for the ticket. Same with product reviews - same with books, kind of. I have no..."Skye,
In response to your question regarding how book prices are established, I offer the following.
Independent and self-published authors have a lot of control over the price charged for their work. They pretty much set the price.
Mainline traditional publishers sell their contracted authors' books to commercial vendors on-consignment at a 40% to 60% discount from list price, depending upon the size of the order. Each vendor's selling price varies. It is based upon their fixed and discretionary overhead, overall inventory and sales volume, and established profit margin. Books that remain unsold after a time period stipulated in the initial consignment contract are returned to the publisher by the vendor.
This information was obtained from books read and a seminar attended four years ago, so it may not be up to date. It should provide you with a general idea though.
Reviewers aren't necessarily writers, editors or professionals who check grammar. They aren't paid for that; it's not their job. Writers however, once they publish a book are the ones subject to that criteria. Expecting a reviewer to be at that level isn't a reasonable expectation. Most reviews are left for readers and as other have stated the main question in readers minds is "Is it an enjoyable read and why or why not?" As a reader that's what I look for.
Okay, got my signals crossed on the reviewer vs critic bit. (Read Micah's comments, am duly ashamed).All right, if the reviewer makes numerous grammatical/spelling mistakes in their write-up, you might take what they say with a grain of salt. Fair enough. But their comments are still valuable in the sense of their enjoyment of the novel (or not).
As for Christine's points about authors telling readers how to do things, I don't think anyone was actually saying that. I think that people were simply pointing out that some reviewers were not the same as critics and that some of the people on this forum consider the star rating system nebulous. (I haven't read all the responses here so I might have missed something).
Personally, I'm grateful when someone reads my novels and leaves a comment. While I may disagree with them on their review, what they write IS their right, and at the very least they've taken the time to look my book over. You can't ask for much more than that.
Skye wrote: "Another question about prices. I know if I get a free movie ticket, the movie doesn't have to be as good as if I paid for the ticket. Same with product reviews - same with books, kind of. I have no..."There is no standard for pricing Indie books. Some Indie authors figure in their out of pocket expenses (editing, formatting, cover artists, assistants), others don't. There's a lot of market research out there about which prices are more favorable to readers and which are not. I know how much time and effort I put into my writing and I'd like to be compensated for it, but I also understand that readers don't care (nor should they). They're looking at the finished product.
I base my asking price on what I would pay as a reader for similar material. (2.99-3.99 with occasional sales) I try to give good value at a reasonable price readers can afford. So far, it seems to be working and I'm earning a living doing it.
I spend a lot of money on ebooks and I expect a satisfying return on my investment. I won't pay paperback prices for an ebook I don't really own. Why should I expect my readers to. I won't pay $2.99 for a 20 page short story. I won't pay .99 for a serial chapter that will cost me $20 by the end of the story and it amazes me that people do. I resent authors who present me with a trilogy only to discover it's a single book in three parts for which they expect me to pay a hard cover price. I don't care how popular you are. You've ripped me off. I won't be back. Ever.
But that's just me, the cheapskate, who still has a library up the street where I can read your book for free.
Willow wrote: "I know that we are supposed to take bad reviews in stride and not respond to them. I intend to follow that advice. But, this is my debut novel, and my first review. It was rated 2.0. Ouch!As an i..."
If the review has commentary, take from it what you can. If the reviewer claims that you are doing something wrong in your writing...take a look at it and discover if you are. If you are unsure, (which can happen because we are too close to our own writing), you can ask someone that you trust (not a friend/fan), or you can wait for more reviews. If you get a few reviews with the same comment, then you might need to get a mentor to show you how to correct it or talk to your editor.
If the comments are just harsh criticism...IGNORE THEM. They were having a bad day, were triggered by a name in your book that reminded them of an ex....or whatever. Brutally harsh is almost never useful and typically comes from a jerk.
And never let a bad review make you stop writing. Use it as a tool to get better at it.
Jacqueline wrote: "Skye wrote: "Another question about prices. I know if I get a free movie ticket, the movie doesn't have to be as good as if I paid for the ticket. Same with product reviews - same with books, kind ..."Jacqueline, it doesn't make you a cheapskate, it makes you a smart buyer. Your points on pricing and ownership are very valid. To me books are like real estate, real estate has $/sq ft and books have a $/page count.
As a reader and not in any way a writer I hate leaving low reviews, and even in a 3 star review I like to be clear but kind and constructive in the reasons why I didn't rate it higher. Not necessarily for the author but for other readers who might not like the things I like and who might really enjoy the aspects that bothered me. It's also why I tend to read reviews that are longer and more detailed. If I see a one star review that just states "This book sucks" I'm not going to drop it from my to-read list. Everyone likes different things so maybe in a low review someone mentions they didn't care for x, y, z. Well neither do I, but my mother-in-law likes those kinds of books so while its not for me I'll recommend it to her. I can completely understand how low reviews would be hurtful to the authors but with something so subjective you really have to try and not take it personally. Which I get is much easier said than done.
Bec wrote (#154): "I don't see authors telling readers how to review here, I see people answering questions and giving their opinions...They were asked for those opinions...Arrogance and condescension works both ways. ..."I was responding (#148) to the comments directly ahead of mine (#147 and back). They in fact stated that if a reviewer couldn't write properly their reviews would be ignored. Other comments seemed to feel a person's spelling errors were humorous.
The web site you refer to, The Veritable Fount, compiled comments from numerous READERS as to the things they would like to see writers do. On the advice of several writers, who felt the suggestions had excellent merit, those comments were reproduced on the site.
I do not know why these suggestions are a problem for you. I hope this explanation clears up any misunderstanding. There was no arrogance or condescension involved in the posting and the response to it by other writers has been extremely positive.
I initially replied because a spelling error is neither sufficient reason to ignore a review, nor to ridicule a person, Your comment discrediting a respected reviewer for a spelling error is the exact attitude I was addressing in my comment.
The website in question can be found here:
https://theveritablefount.wordpress.com/
Christine wrote: "Bec wrote (#154): "I don't see authors telling readers how to review here, I see people answering questions and giving their opinions...They were asked for those opinions...Arrogance and condescens..."Exactly! Don't you see?authors trying to dictate to reviewers and vice versa?
It's all balderdash, it is what it is, just people!
The part in your post I found arrogant was the "here we go again ............" Criticising authors for criticising reviewers for criticising authors and so it tediously goes on and on. I see now, you don't recognise tongue in cheek comment, irony, possibly because it does not comply with you national norm, and, as this is a predominantly American site I shall, in future keep this in check
Goodreads Authors/Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
Twilight (other topics)Fifty Shades of Grey (other topics)
To Kill a Mockingbird (other topics)
The Governess (other topics)
Juror 1389: Dorsie Raines Renninger (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
John R. Patin (other topics)Noorilhuda (other topics)
Reviews are simply a reader's opinion and what is important to John won't be important to Jane.