Comments? Reviews? Blog entries?

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

We call them reviews. GR called them comments, and now says "what did you think?" Some people use the space to talk about who gave them the book or what nostalgic memories it evokes or other personal stuff.

What do you like to use the review space for? How much of yourself do you like to share in your reviews or reactions or thoughts?

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

I do all of the above, for different books. My reviews are generally very casual, seldom edited (though usually proofread), meant to be like friendly chats with all my GR friends.

I like seeing the more personal stuff in others' reviews. I, personally, generally don't have as much to say as some people do, but I appreciate the heart & soul shared when someone else is moved by a book.

[L J]

I may start with non personal but then tend to say what I liked or didn't like and why. The why is where the more personal comes in but how much personal varies.

[Beth]

The idea of reviewing art "objectively" is distasteful to me--as mentioned in another thread, reviewing a book like it was a consumer product. I have a few GR friends who assign numerical ratings to plot, character, setting, etc., and I can't bring myself to read those.

Since people rate books differently, there's no real objectivity anyhow, so bring on the subjectivity, I say. I always enjoy it when someone puts their own experiences into their reviews, or how a book's themes resonated with them, etc. It's a lowering of defenses and draws me into their writing and their experience with the book.

Of course, forcing that aspect into every review wouldn't work. Fluff reading typically isn't friendly to it, for example.

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

Good points. It's probably easier for most of us to admit to how a book makes us feel, or what tangential ideas or memories it evokes, than to try to more objectively analytical. Probably it would be good for many of us to just 'lean into' it a bit more.

[L J]

Was looking back at past reviews and ran across some where I commented about the series as well as the book. The comments about series tend to be personal, usually saying why I continue reading or quit.

Sometimes I keep reading series hoping books get better. I've come to realize that is unrealistic and now quit more readily. After three books in a series and five in connected series I rated each book 3* which may mean I should have given up sooner. I think I kept hoping for better since they are in a favorite genre with some favorite elements. Disappointment is reflected in my review.

In review I ended by saying:
...I can see why [these series] are popular but... I'm casting the rest from tbr mountains into not-my-thing gulch.

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

Hah! Gulch - good way of putting it! Yes, series do tend to peter out, or reflect that the author is getting too full of themselves, in my experience.

[L J]

Cheryl wrote: "Hah! Gulch - good way of putting it! Yes, series do tend to peter out, or reflect that the author is getting too full of themselves, in my experience."

In this case they didn't so much peter out as they never got going for me. Characters were a bit too silly to interest me and I didn't become enmeshed in the paranormal world because world building was scattered across half a dozen series. It just didn't seem worth reading 20+ books when there were others to read.

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

Good choice!

[Raymond]

LJ, what do you do when each book is better than the one before in a series?

[L J]

Raymond wrote: "LJ, what do you do when each book is better than the one before in a series?"

Continue reading. It's what I hope for but it doesn't always happen.

In this particular case I read 3 books each in 2 series and 2 in a third and I was never caught up in them the way I hoped.

ETA: There were others I dnf.

[Raymond]

Tis' rare it happens, I agree, but now and then.... Lol just reread the "Wheel of Time" Series again. There are a couple of mid-level books in the middle but they were always good.

[L J]

Raymond wrote: "Tis' rare it happens, I agree, but now and then.... Lol just reread the "Wheel of Time" Series again. There are a couple of mid-level books in the middle but they were always good."

Series often have, several books in, connecting or transition book. Some people don't like this but I usually do, especially if they feature ensemble cast. They're a chance to catch up with characters and events from earlier books and can set the stage for future books.

ETA: I also like books that feature secondary characters but I've seen others complain when books don't feature main characters. To me secondary characters and their stories add depth to the world.