More than Just a Rating discussion
questions and discussions
>
Is a synopsis valuable?
date
newest »
newest »
I think some people like that, but I would prefer not to see a reiteration of the description. I can read what the book is about on the book page. I really just want to know your thoughts.
Mod
Now, for me, as I'm reading the reviews and trying to decide if I want to read the book, and it's just what we can see already on the GR description right on the book page, maybe not so much. If the summary focuses on different aspects of the book, or is worded distinctly differently, coming from the fly-leaf or blurb or the reviewer's memory, it could help.
I mean, anything can help. Summaries that counter overly-dramatic descriptions are good. Synopses that talk about what happened in the first 300 pages building up to what the publisher is bragging on can help.
(Bear in mind that I am of the opinion that *anything* helps. :)
What do *you* think?
Now I'm just sharing my own thoughts, and mostly about plot kind of things. You use the word 'theme' and I don't think about that much.
I don't really think a synopsis is valuable enough to require more than 2 or 3 sentences. Enough for me to know if it's a setting/scenario that I can jive with and the genre tells me half of that already. On Goodreads I don't think it's necessary at all unless the description on the book page is incorrect or misleading.
Mod
Mod
What prompted my question was I was looking at several reviews of a book and noted the repetitiveness of these summaries. What I was looking for was the impressions, thoughts and feeling of the readers that would help me to decide if I would like the book. I get your point BunWat, there may be reasons for the content, IE you want to remember so you "make note", so as it's been said, nothing "wrong" with it.What I really like in that summary is the reader's version of the story. When I see that, I feel like I got an "inside" scope.
Mod
One issue is plagiarism. I do wish people would put the description in quotation marks if they just copied a book description or blurb, and then note from *where* they copied it! GR can't police the myriad, but it seems like we should all know better than to copy sans attribution! (Ok, I guess I'd better put that in the topic I created for cautions.)
OK, so back to the original question: is a synopsis valuable. And I guess we would have to say that it is valuable for some reasons to some people. Each book may provide a different requirement.
I think one thing to understand is that not everyone wrote the review specifically for goodreads. I write my reviews for my book review blog and then crosspost to goodreads and other places. I try to snip out the summary for both since the info is, you know, RIGHT THERE, but it's harder for some posts.
Mod
If the synopsis is already included with the book description then I prefer not to read it again in a review. However, if the book description doesn't always give me what I want or need having a short synopsis in the review can help at times. Sometimes the synopsis in the book description can be misleading and its nice to have reviews that give a better and more accurate synopsis.
Most of the time I don't like to see a synopsis in a review, however I do like it and will put them in my own reviews if I see a book that hasn't got a synopsis, as this is extremely helpful in telling others what the book is about - few people will decide to read a book based just on the title, even more so if the book entry hasn't got a cover either on GR. In those instances I do think that is enormously helpful.
I see a lot of blog reviews that start with the publisher's synopsis and then they do their own. For me it's so repetitive and unnecessary. Most newer releases we all pretty much know the basics, so I try to avoid giving much plot run down unless the blurb doesn't do it well (I hope that makes sense). With older OOP's with no blurb or reviews on Amazon, I will go into more plot description just so readers can get a feeling for what it's about.I'm more interested in the reader's impression of the story, the pacing, quality of writing and even how much sex and/or violence is in a book. Everyone's taste differs, and I'd rather know what I'm looking at going in.
I used to be allergic to writing anything about books; contents, but now I sometimes say a few sentences about what a book is about, but I try to provide it in the context of my thoughts/feelings.I usually don't like reading a lot about what goes on in a book before I read it. I tend to prefer reviews that stress the reviewers' feelings & thoughts about a book.
However, I have several friends who read children's picture books, and vintage or esoteric books (sometimes they are the only Goodreads' member who's shelved them!) and then I usually really appreciate synopses.
BunWat also has a good point about how sometimes reviews are written when a book has no description and the description is added later.
My reviews tend to end up on the summary/book report-ish side. Mostly because I want to be able to remember what happened in the book when I go back and look at it later. I don't copy the synopsis from the cover, though I have seen a few reviews that have.
Mod
Whoops, I'm a bit late, but wanted to say that when I first started reviewing I would do more of a summary than I do now. Now I mostly talk (and talk, and talk) about my thoughts about the book, or how I felt about it.Same as Misfit (msg 16) I will do a synopsis of sorts if there isn't one on GR (sometimes with old books).
I make sure to do one if the synopsis doesn't match the book. That is a pet peeve of mine -- I read mostly romances, and sometimes there's a huge difference between what the publisher tells you the book is about and what the author has actually written. It becomes a big deal when the sub-genres get mixed -- erotic romance into regular historical, for example. People have a right to know they're not getting what they think they are, so I'll point that out.
And sometimes, when reviewing a book that was really bad (imo, of course) I end up re-telling the story with my own "editorial" comments. (Sometimes you have to do it to show how bad the book actually was.)
Tammy, some of these things, like genre and descriptions, can be changed by those of us that are Librarians. Let us know the particulars and we will make any changes we can.
Sorry Dawn, what I meant was old books where the back of the cover didn't actually tell you very much about the book, or new books where the publisher pulls a bait-and-switch.
Tammy wrote: "...And sometimes, when reviewing a book that was really bad (imo, of course) I end up re-telling the story with my own "editorial" comments. (Sometimes you have to do it to show how bad the book actually was.) "Damn, I think I have to start following your reviews now. :-)
I usually do a short blurb (in my own words, with an editorial slant at times) up to the launching off point of the real action of the story and then the rest are my own thoughts and impressions. I need something to jog the memory months or years down the road....
I often do a synopsis for books that have no, or very little description (especially older books that are currently out of print), and I usually also tend to do a synopsis if I am reviewing a book written in a language other than English.And I have found that a bit of a synopsis, one that does not tell me too much, is a wonderful tool for deciding wether or or not to read the book (especially if I am a bit unsure).
And even if some of the books do have a description on GR, the back covers of the older romances are more focused on terms like "blazing ecstasy" and "searing passion" than any plot particulars. :)
Karla (Mossy Love Grotto) wrote: "And even if some of the books do have a description on GR, the back covers of the older romances are more focused on terms like "blazing ecstasy" and "searing passion" than any plot particulars. :)"I read a lot of classic girls fiction, and most of these have no description either on the back of the book (as they are usually missing their dust jackets) or on Goodreads.
Tammy wrote: "Sorry Dawn, what I meant was old books where the back of the cover didn't actually tell you very much about the book, or new books where the publisher pulls a bait-and-switch."There are a lot of blurbs that either don't tell enough or are flat out wrong, so yes a brief synopsis is helpful. A lot of books I read are based on historical characters/settings. I.e. if a book is based upon the life of Marie Antoinette, we've got a pretty good idea where the story is going so more than a brief run-down isn't necessary.
Mod
But the re-telling with editorial annotation sounds like fun, too!
"So, I will pose a question: is a synopsis of the book valuable in a review, especially if it is almost word for word from the "back of the book" or fly-leaf? I do like to have a sense of what the book's theme is, but I don't know how much value this brings to the review. Any thoughts on this?"