Do You Ever Go Back and Change Your Book Ratings???

[Sandi]

I just took a look at the books I've read this year and decided to change the ratings on some of the books I've read recently. On some, I lowered the rating because it didn't really stick with me or because I decided that I didn't like them as much as I initially thought. On others, I raised the rating because it had kept me thinking after I had read it. Some were changed in either direction because I had participated in some discussions that improved my opinions.

Do you ever go back and change your ratings?

[Lori]

Yes Sandi! And for exactly the same reason - the sticking factor. Altho sometimes I'll change it higher for books I read a long time ago because even tho it didn't stick at the time I loved it dearly.

[Angie]

I rarely change my ratings unless it is a book in a series. So I will rate the book on how it matches up to the other ones in the series, so sometimes I will change a rating after reading a new book in that series.

[Summer]

I change mine quite frequently, because when I'm in the zone of book-rating, I often rate them all higher than they really deserve.

[Brooke]

I've generally only done this on classics I was assigned in high school that I hated at the time, and then later realized I appreciate them now more than I did then.

[Rusty]

Sometimes I change ratings because I realize I rated a book higher than I should have, because I’m supposed to like it. Like “The Great Gatsby”, for example, or “The Da Vinci Code”. Everyone told me that I would love them, but honestly, I was not impressed.

[TinaNoir]

If upon a second or third read I feel that I may have rated the book too high or too low I may go back and re-rate. I tend not to do it too much, though, because I kinda value the impression the book made on me at the time.

[Cliff]

I think its funny when I find myself influenced by how other people rated a book. Usually this only happens when its someone whose opinion I value, but then if I see someone gave a book 5 stars were I only gave it 3 and I'll start thinking about it and decide its really a 4. You wouldn't think other people's tastes would be so influential on your own, but at least for me they sometimes are.

[Jon]

I don't normally change my ratings. I either really liked it, though it was good mind candy or hated it. Re-reading it doesn't normally influence me because I normally only re-read books I really liked.

[Shannon]

I sometimes do upon a re-read, or following an intense discussion about a book, but generally I try to stick with my initial gut response the first time around. I don't actually like rating books because my responses to them are more complicated than that, but I think the stars are pretty (!) and Goodreads' rating system suits me, what with the "I liked it" "I loved it" rating. It's when I have to give a rating based on how good the book is that it gets tricky.

[Kai]

all the time! i don't think book ratings (or my opinion about anything in general) can remain static. i think also rating books sometimes gets difficult cause i sometimes rate books for different reasons. I have to admit, most of the books that i've liked enough to read again, wouldn't be considered very good literature :)

[Jerrod]

Since I'm newer to this site, I've changed my ratings to reflect what the star's represent, ok, liked, loved, amazing. It's not like rating my music so I've changed a few things. But most of the books I've got rated I've already read 2-3 times, minus maybe a few. So it's just being honest with myself and grading them appropriately instead of treating it like my music ratings, which are slanted.

[bsc]

I don't tend to pay attention to GR's descriptions for the stars. Two stars, to me, is not "okay". That should be three stars. At some point, I may decide to update all my reviews accordingly.

[Brooke]

I don't tend to pay attention to GR's descriptions for the stars. Two stars, to me, is not "okay". That should be three stars. At some point, I may decide to update all my reviews accordingly.

Ditto - in fact, I didn't even know GR used descriptions. Three stars for me means it was a decent read that I'm glad I read, but it's nothing overly special - although a lot of my 3 stars are really 3.5 stars in my mind, so there's often a bit of differences between all my 3-star books.

By the time I start choosing 2 stars, that means the book had some major deficiencies. 1s and 5s are rarely doled out, but those that receive them are worthy.

[Shannon]

Out of curiosity, Ben, if 3 stars is Okay, what would 2 and 1 stars mean for you?

I actually tend to stick to GR's star descriptions, I find it useful to rate according to your personal reaction and I don't have a problem with the system here - if I had to rate a book on my own I'd get so bogged down on the writing style, plotting, character development etc., there wouldn't be any room for whether I liked the book.

Does that make sense? That way, I can give high star ratings to slightly (or very) trashy popular fiction because I enjoyed it so much, or thought it was crap - and the same goes with literature etc., but a paranormal romance book with 4 stars is not comparable to a book of literature with 4 stars. There are books I've given low ratings to despite their literary merits, based on my own subjective reading of it, and I find GR's system to be very user-friendly :)

[bsc]

My view of the stars corresponds exactly to Amazon's, which is:
1 - hate it
2 - don't like it
3 - ok
4 - good
5 - excellent

To me, it just doesn't make sense to have four of available rating to be "positive". I don't mean anything else by it. I agree with your other statements.

[Gbina]

I like that GR's has four levels of "positive" as I tend to have a larger range of positive feelings about the books I read and I like the ability to differentiate.

If I don't like the book, then I don't like the book. And if I hate the book, then I am probably not going to finish it in the first place. So I don't feel the need to have more than one negative response.

However, after all is said and done, the 1-5 stars likely represents our ratings accurately regardless of the description we go by. Everyone has a different range of tolerance when it comes to reading preferences and it is quite likely that Ben's "Don't like it" lines up with my "It was Ok".

[bsc]

However, after all is said and done, the 1-5 stars likely represents our ratings accurately regardless of the description we go by

That's likely. To me, there are books that I don't like but I am able to recognize some goodness in them. Then there are those books that are simply horrid. Thus the need for the two negative ratings.

[Mark]

My rating system is:

5=Excellent
4=Very Good
3=Good
2=Mediocre
1=Poor

I'd definitely reread a 4-5 book, and maybe a 3 book, but probably not a 2 and never a 1.

Mark.

[Tabrez]

Rating books is a complicated business for me. I don't change the old ratings much though the temptation is there all the time. Whenever I read new books, the ratings of the old books seem to need adjustment relative to these new books. Rating is always relative to me so I find it difficult to make sense of my own ratings in a year's time.

[Kristjan]

I go back and change my ratings fairly often (usually only by 1 star) because my perception of a book does change with time. Even if I thought it was an execellent read, if I don't remember much about it after a year goes by, it will usually drop a star. Likewise a few books stay with me a lot longer then I initially expected (or I experience one of those aha moments after thinking on it awhile ... such as after book club discussions :) and I might add a star. The only books that get 1 star are books I never finished or had to really struggle to get done (I use my book shelves to split these up effectively giving me a seven star system since I do the same thing on the top). Single star books are pretty rare as I am reasonable good at avoiding those based upon reviews and back cover summaries.

[Sandi]

Kristjan--I like your system.

[Lori]

Ditto!

For awhile I was wondering why my average rating is so high. Shannon said it best - I avoid books that would be single or even double stars.

[Rusty]

I’m a concrete thinker – so for me each star represents 20%, as though I’m grading the quality of the book, I guess. Although I won’t give a book the full five stars unless I feel it merits at least a 95%. Why do I do this – I don’t know.

[Kai]

i kind of think I have to finish a book before i can rate it cause sometimes books that seem like a waste of time can kind of make up for it with a really good ending, i think i remember feeling the great and secret show was a complete waste of time, until i got to the ending

so if i finish the book, i'll give it at least one star, and then go from there. sometimes i rate by thinking along the lines of, now that i've read this book, does it make a difference or could i have been just as easily entertained by watching a 90 min movie of the book (and spent the rest of the time doing something else, like sleeping), did it change the way i think about something, etc.