Should authors review each other?

[Larry]

As a member of noted Author and Novelist Warren Adler's newsletter list, I just received an interesting post in which the author of "War of the Roses" asks the question: "Should Novelists Review Another Novelist’s Novels?"
Not being a novelist, nor having pretensions in that direction, I had no answer but his question does raise a similar question in my mind. Should authors review each other? I'd love to hear the comments of all professional level writers at the Published Authors Biz group: http://www.goodreads.com/group/show/5...

[Larry]

It seems I'm a trend-setter. In another Goodreads group, Shawn just posted the following, along with my response.

Shawn wrote: "Here's an interesting article very pertinent to this discussion and reviews from the NY Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/20/tec......"

Shawn, thank you so much for posting that story. Interesting that fake reviews are dilluting the value of the remainder. Didn't I say something like that? :-) Oh yeah, I did. I especially liked the following passage from the New York Times story: “The whole system falls apart if made-up reviews are given the same weight as honest ones,” said one of the researchers, Myle Ott. Among those seeking out Mr. Ott, a 22-year-old Ph.D. candidate in computer science, after the study was published was Google,.."

I also must admire the mild language used by the Times: "...an industry of fibbers and promoters has sprung up to buy and sell raves for a pittance." I would have used stronger terms: ...an industry of liars and con artists attempting to defraud book buyers.

[Ey]

I have a couple of (maybe a few) questions. Can an author 'not' be a reader?Does being an author/reader disqualify you as a reviewer? Can two authors, who like each others books, not be allowed to write a review of the book they read?
I don't see a problem with it. Honesty is in the fingertip of the reviewer. One can just never be sure, so the choice to buy falls on the reader.

[Scott]

I think some research into the history of literary criticism, as well as of reviews in papers like the NYT, will show you that most reviewers are writers/authors. It's nothing new.

There is a big difference in the two questions, though: should authors review each other? Why not?

However, the problem of "fake" reviews is indeed a problem. It's dishonest at best, fraud in the extreme cases. So, it should be stopped.

[Patricia]

I think so, but as long as the author doing the reviewing is honest about the review like they would any other review they did.

[Larry]

Scott wrote: "I think some research into the history of literary criticism, as well as of reviews in papers like the NYT, will show you that most reviewers are writers/authors. It's nothing new.

There is a big ..."


I'm confused by your response. Is that a yes or no?

[Larry]

Patricia wrote: "I think so, but as long as the author doing the reviewing is honest about the review like they would any other review they did."

That's the whole point -- many are not being honest, instead scratching each other's backs with undeserved four and five star reviews.

[Patricia]

Ahh. Well, that's sad. Maybe it's just me, but I'd feel irritated if someone asked me to give a less than honest review.