The Bronze Horseman discussion
Book Club
>
How do you rate books?
date
newest »
newest »
We had a similar thread somewhere, I think the topic was whether or not you stayed with a book that you didn't like and why, then it sort of morphed into a "star" discussion.In any case, my personal system is 4-5 for books that touched me in some way, either books that I will pick up over and over when I need something to read, books that I remember (generally because I loved them, but not always), books that I may have struggled with at the time, but felt uplifted when I finished reading. As an example, "The English Patient" was a tough read, but the book was powerful when it was finished. Probably more 4 stars; I also don't give out a lot of 5 stars.
The 1-2 star books are those that I totally disliked, but finished, or in rare cases, didn't finish, although I do tend to finish books unless they are truly ghastly. An example is "The Children's Book" by Byatt, which was either a Booker finalist or winner, respected author, great reviews, etc, but I hated it. Finished it, but hated it. Also detest anything written by Elin Hildenbrand and almost anything written by Jodi Picoult.
Then, that leaves the majority-- the 3 stars. Not good, not bad, just disappointing. And there are way too many of those. I guess I would almost rather read a 2 star book, because it would leave an impression, even a bad impression, than this endless series of mediocrity. An example here would be "The Lace Reader". I so wanted to love that book, and while it had many high points, I can never remember the ending, even after finding it again at the library and re-reading the end. So, ultimately flawed and 3 stars.
Someone who shall remain nameless took exception to my giving "Da Vinci Code" 4 stars while slamming "The Castaways." I didn't want to get into a debate with her over my reviews (they are MY reviews, after all) but I do take popular culture into account on certain reviews, such as Da Vinci. Like it, love it, or hate it, it was a cultural experience and I actually thought it was a pretty good read. Unrealistic, implausible, yes, but you are going to remember it and I have read it a couple of times just to re-read the puzzles. Thus, I gave it 4 stars because I have read it more than once.
My system is very similar Linda.. If they touch me, if they linger in my brain.. If I cry, pull my hair out, or sigh with pleasure after the last page is turned... They are 4-5 stars...Writing is a form of art, different for every artist.. No one could truly be compared to the other..
I rate the story, as well as the writing style, I rate the feeling, rather then strict technical ability.. All while remembering and rating within the Genre... For instance...
A Harlequin book couldn't be compared to an Epic story as Outlander.. Or The Bronze Horseman, Cause they dont share any characteristics other than 'Romance' and words on paper bounded in pretty covers. So why try? They are both great stories on their own. So I rate them thus...
I think I'm more in line with you on the rating scale, Mumbo~ I get irritated with people handing out five stars willie nillie, because I check their ratings hoping to find a real gem. Half stars would definitely be appreciated. I only have 13 books on my "five star favorites" list, but a lot of them come from very different genres. The five-star urban fantasy book cannot hope to compete with TBH as far as epic scale and quality of writing, but in comparison with a ton of other books I've read in that genre it really shines. So it gets five stars.
My rating system sounds pretty much exactly like yours, which unfortunately means I have a lot of three and four star books. It's not very helpful to other people unless I write an actual review, which I often don't take the time to do. Bad me.
My rating system sounds pretty much exactly like yours, which unfortunately means I have a lot of three and four star books. It's not very helpful to other people unless I write an actual review, which I often don't take the time to do. Bad me.
Every book, every story is its own. I cannot bring myself to rate books. But the ones that stay with me, the ones that I remember years and years later are the ones that I buy. So I guess the books I've purchased are '5 stars' in a sense.
After having read TBH i find it incredible hard to give book five stars, i think i have about 19 books om my five stars shelf, and most of them are part of a series. I really don't understand how ppl can give five or four stars to almost every book they read. I find it pretty hard to give books more then three stars.
Natalie wrote: "After having read TBH i find it incredible hard to give book five stars, i think i have about 19 books om my five stars shelf, and most of them are part of a series. I really don't understand how p..."Natalie - I couldn't agree more! If you look at my ratings from last year I was a 5 star wh*re... I loved everything I read! Then this year was pretty much the same and THEN I read TBH and it was THE game changer for me on rating my reads. I mean, how could it NOT be. I found that I became way more critical of my reads. Books that I would have given 4 or maybe even 5 stars before are now getting 2 or solid 3 star ratings. And you know, that's OK. What's wrong with a 3 star rated book? It means "I LIKED IT". I don't have to fall in love with everything I read. I read for entertainment, just like some people watch TV... and I'm sure not everything people watch on TV is their go to must watch TV. My 5 star list has gone way down now. And that's fine by me. A 5 star read has to stay with me. I have to rave about it to my friends, I have to pimp the book like it's the best thing since sliced bread. I have to love it and it has to change me in some way. I have to FEEL it. A 4 star book is just a step down, just not quite as obsessive about it, but still I will tell people about it. A 3 star book is a good entertaining read for me. Made me feel good. Touched me and I went on. I may say to a friend, "hey, have you read..." A 2 star book is not entertaining to me at all and a 1 star book is one that was almost a DNF.
I agree with everything you said. If you compare to movie ratings/reviews, a three is usually a decent film. Four stars are really rare and it's almost unbearable of that a movie gets a five. So, i'm living by that from now on :))
Personally, I only ever give 5 stars to those epic books I read and reread over and over, and literally can't stop raving about (all up, only probably 4 or 5 books in that 5 star category) and great books that I really enjoyed but just fell short of that level I rate 4 stars. Three stars are for the ok books, I didn't hate them but I wouldn't re-read or recommend them to others, 2 stars for books I really didn't enjoy but weren't abysmal. 1 stars are for the absolutely deplorable books I loathed &/or could not even be bothered finishing...
I try to not over-rate 5 star books as I feel it devalues those truly magnificent books I adored. I'm wondering if I'm too harsh?! What do you base your ratings on?
Also, I really wish this site could give 1/2 stars, some books are too good for a lower star but fall just short of the next one up (ie, I LOVED A Thousand Splendid Suns but as I read it after the Kite Runner, I felt The Kite Runner was slightly better so rated A Thousand Splendid Suns as a 4 star, but loved it more than other 4 star books I've rated, I would've given it 4 1/2 stars if I could...