Connecting Readers and Writers discussion
Writer's Station
>
BAD review or NO review. That is the question.
I'd recommend putting your novel forwards for ARR or bookreading groups.With regard to bad reviews, I'm all for them. If they're all 5-star, then it smacks of pandering by friends/family.
Bad reviews aren't as bad as no readership to me. I have around 6 or 7 reviews for one of my books, and a few more for some other ones. It is ALWAYS better to have more reviews (good or bad) than to have none. If you have NO reviews, it means no one is reading or really giving a crap about what they've read by you. A bad review still makes people curious about a book, and despite the stupidity of this, sometimes well-written bad reviews will actually draw a curious reader to buy a book. Bad reviews also indicate that the writer is not buying or bribing for reviews, but is getting honest feedback from people. Of course, good reviews do well for getting buzz, but this is a case of where any attention is better than no attention.
Lou wrote: "I see a problem with the question. If your book has been out for a while, and you have only one review, good or bad, you have a problem. However, if you keep getting reviewed sooner or later one wi..."Of course, it depends on WHY the reviews are considered to be 'bad.' Is the book offensive? That creates a real good marketability for a book. People will read a book just to be p***ed off by it.
Lou,Thanks for responding.
If an author has only one review to his or her credit, I agree with you: it's a problem. There's not a great deal this author can do about the situation but suck it up -- and wait patiently for additional reviews.
And shame on me if I confused you with my use of "bad" (even if I, quite intentionally, used the word in quotation marks). My interest really is knowing what our fellow GR writers think about reviews written by someone who's simply missed the whole point.
As a 'for instance,' if someone's novel is badly written, is sloppy and full of typos, or is simply illogical, then shame on the writer -- and the reviewer should be encouraged to write an appropriately negative review. If the hue and cry, however, is something more along the lines of "the author uses too many big words" or "I (the reader/reviewer) don't like the author's use of foreign words (whose meaning I don't know) and foreign places (I've never been to)," I think we have a horse of a different color.
Just my opinion. Others are welcome.
Russell
Jared,Case in point: E. L. James's Fifty Shades of Grey . The buzz continues.
Russell
Russell wrote: "Jared,Case in point: E. L. James's
Fifty Shades of Grey
. The buzz continues.
Russell"
I have to say, all the stuff on that book has made me curious about it, and i am NOT a romance reader. I've heard terrible things about it.
J.
@Jared @RussellIt's just a poor man's 'The Secretary'
I did like the Secretary. That was an intriguing movie. Of course, Maggie Gyllenhall (spelling) was not a bad part of it either. She's pretty good lookin' I'd say.
ARR is a way of getting goodreads members to read and review your novel:http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/8...
Jared,If you want to read a really hilarious review of the book, I recommend Katrina Lumsden's contribution.
You can find it here: http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...
The review (IMHO) is worth far more than the book.
Russell
Thanks, Stephen!I've just joined. We'll see whether Tana still has any room left in this traveling caravan.
Russell
My pleasure :)Here are a few others:
http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/7...
http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/8...
The problem is that at the end of the day writers have no control over what reviews appear so whether we'd prefer no review to a bad review is totally academic. We're going to get what we're going to get.As to "Missing the point".... if a competent reviewer, that is someone who has reviewed several books of either your genre or a variety of genre's then perhaps it is the fault of the writer for not making the point better. I've got some short stories that some friends don't find creepy. Is that because they don't "get" that they're supposed to be creepy or because I didn't do a good enough job conveying the creep factor?
I also think that a variety of reviews, good and bad, are good overall for a book. I almost ALWAYS read 1 star reviews on products. I want to know the worst of it before I get it. In the case of video games the 1 stars often tell me more than the 5 stars do.
Thanks once again, Stephen.Unfortunately, YA Fiction just ain't my genre -- so, I'll pass on the third option.
Russell
It depends on what you would call "bad." They may say something in their review that might make another reader say "wait, you might not like that, but it interest me" or "that's not the impression I got from the blurb, maybe I should check it out." Of course, no review is better than outright bashing, and it's certainly frustrating when people don't get it or say "I usually don't this kind of work and let me remind you of why by reviewing all the things I dislike about this genre by reviewing this one." I think the bottom line is that it's going to happen and as hurtful/frustrating as it is, we have to respect that every reader has a right to their opinion (even if they're so biased that they should have had enough discresion to just rate work they prefer and leave the rest alone).
I actually think a bad review can be good for your book. I said in one of the few one star reviews I've given, "it's not that the book is poorly written, it's just that I don't want Goodreads to ever suggest a similar book to me again." (It was an erotic book that strayed into non-consensual BDSM and deeply offended me.) The point is that honest ratings help goodreads suggest the right book to the right person. A bad review here or there can help that process along for your book too, making sure it not only ends up in readers hands, but in the hands of the readers who will actually enjoy it. A bad review can also keep your book out of the hands of people who will hate it, and spare you many more bad reviews down the line.
Stephen wrote: "ARR is a way of getting goodreads members to read and review your novel:http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/8..."
Agreed, Stephen. And IMO, the ARR programs help greatly in facilitating a better match of reader to book genre, allowing for a more specific interest (to the reader) in terms of storyline, characters, location/setting - expectations in general. And while there may be many reasons for an unpleasant review, one of them shouldn't be that the book is not of a subject matter that the reader would normally gravitate to. Pretty hard to come up with a positive opinion when reading a book that offers little of value (depending on what those individual criteria are)
You were right. That review was absolutely hilarious.
I agree that bad reviews can be positive. When I'm looking to buy a book I read a few good reviews, but then I find one or two that only give the book a couple of stars. Knowing why someone else didn't like it can help me decide if I will like it. Maybe they rated it low because it wasn't "their kind of story" but it is my kind of story. Or maybe they had issues with something else that I can, either overlook, or even possibly enjoy in a story.
Frustrating 'bad' reviews are the ones that make outright false accusations.I had one recently on the German edition of my book, which stated it was full of spelling mistakes, grammar errors, and incomplete sentences. The reviewer clearly stated that he hates self-published books too. Nice.
Sad thing is, the translator was not prepared for this sort of behaviour and got quite hurt on the process.
To make matters worse, five librarians, two other translators, and one editor had also gone through the work thoroughly and confirmed there were no glaring errors left.
But the review was potentially helpful in the end because along came other reviewers (including some Amazon top 500 reviewers) to correct them and put them in their place. In the end, potential readers see a book with one 'bad' review which is being argued down in worth by good ones.
I know as writers each review seems monumental in our eyes, but the effect of a bad review on potential readers really doesn't seem to last very long.I've found most of the time a less-than-stellar review will be completely counteracted by one from a happy reader, in very little time. When I first put my book out there, I would get panicky over reviews. But after a while I realized the system evens itself out and takes care of itself.
What one reader doesn't care for is precisely the thing another reader loves.
It's better to just let it roll and continue working on your next project.
Also, if a review is personal, false, misleading, or factually incorrect you can also, sometimes, seek redress through the website. Websites like Good Reads or Amazon have a strong dislike for censoring, however, if a review clearly shows a personal bias that has nothing to do with the book (ie your book has non-consentual sex and the reviewer calls you a misogynist and declares that NO one should read your work on principle) it is possible the review will be removed.Or more importantly it causes no drama to quietly say something to the website, but may have that review cleaned up.
Nice topic. I wrote about this same issue on my blog (www.damonferrellmarbut.com). The post is called "On Making A Bad Book Review One's Bitch". It's basically about having to manage the good and the bad, but being comfortable with genuine frustration when, as was in my one bad review's case, the review not only misinterpreted the book (which is fine) but slammed me for his own perspective, and did so in a mocking tone and actually used fine-line name-calling. It was a scorcher. The person seemed SERIOUSLY upset, almost to the point of comedy, that he had to read the book at all. Who knows? It may have been given to someone who doesn't read my genre or style, so it was impossible for him to get in to the story. In the end, Jenn (just above me) is right, that it IS better to let it roll. Harping on it lets it own you. And it's just opinion, which shouldn't affect your belief in your work, anyway, right? I think it's beneficial to have communities of authors, reviewers and readers like this so idea exchange can happen and no one has to feel they're the only ones facing undesirable situations in a huge indie author industry. Committed writers have to train for this, like boxers, and know what to deflect as well as how to take a punch. Best wishes to everyone and their projects. Cheers!
Lou,I absolutely agree.
Thanks for chiming in.
Russell
Sherri,Thanks for your input.
I quite understand that we all like different genres. I, for one, don't care for vampire literature -- and so, I won't even open the book. At the same time, I frankly wouldn't want anyone to open my book if (s)he doesn't care for the subject-matter (which, as a responsible writer, I certainly hope I've conveyed in the Product Description).
But we're talking here about an entirely different kind of review -- i.e., one that simply misses the point.
Russell
Rachel,Thank you. Good points.
Russell
To Damon's point, when you get those scorcher reviews, most readers can see when someone is just really angry over a book, or may not be getting it. I mean, haven't we all seen reviews for other peoples' work and wondered, "Whoa, the rage here seems way over-the-top. It's just a book/movie"? You might wonder if they get as angry over their eggs not done quite right, too, and get concerned for their blood pressure and general potential for a heart attack. :)
I think readers can discern that kind of stuff, in the long run.
If someone writes you a review that begins in the "This is stupid!" genre, we as writers may want to take it personally. But I think most readers can tell that reviewer perspective is not necessarily going to be helpful in determining whether they will actually enjoy the book or not.
To Russell, that's a great point about responsibility, in terms of presenting your book as a product that fully informs the reader prior to investing time and money in reading it. To Jenn, very true. I also think, from what you said, a hyper-enthusiastic review that's poorly written can sound doubtful and more like a supportive cousin wrote it. I've always tried to exist in a place of neutrality when it comes to ANYTHING people say about my work, simply because it's all an educational tool for learning how the work is being discussed. That's really all it can be after publication. Getting bent out of shape about most reviews is missing the point of writing anyway. There are positives and negatives to both kinds of review. The world is so jam-packed with competing perceptions, best we as the book's creator(s) move toward even temperament.
Thanks, Jenn.It would appear that you agree with both Rachel and Greg.
Russell
Damon,Thanks for your encouraging words (to all of us).
Russell
Damon- I agree a hyper-enthusiastic review, particularly if it's not backed up by specific detail, is also doubtful.If there's an overarching trend in what people say through the reviews, by all means, it's important to take it into consideration. You can learn a lot about how to approach things differently in the future. But the web is certainly the Land o' Everybody's Opinion. Best thing you can do is just move forward.
The one problem is this:A LOT of readers do a sort by star ranking. If a few 1 stars bring you down enough that you don't round up to 4 stars you're just not going to get looked at. It' frustrating, but I think that we undersell just how much ~that~ can weigh in on how we react to reviews. I can live with negativity as long as it doesn't directly cut me out of people even SEEing the book.
Sadly with so much out there, who can blame customers who don't want to sift through dozens of 3 star reviews to look for the one or two that got unfairly slammed?
I go by the rating distribution, which gives a greater indication of the general perceived feeling towards a novel. This is what I go by, as any outlier one's or two's are clearly indicated as such and clearly outside the standard deviation.(Yes, I studied Statistics :))
@Stephen,Good to have a statistician here!
Russell
They typically say all press is good press for a reason. Having said that, one still has to account for volume and substance when it comes to bad reviews.Too many of them and your book must indeed suck. Too few of them and it could just be an angry, bitter reader who wasn't thrilled at your lack of a response to an email praising your work that went straight to junk mail.
Lesson of the story: always blame the internet in some way or form for your problems. Always.
Martin Reed
Martin,Courtesy -- yes, even where successful authors are concerned -- is never out of place. If someone has taken the time to read your book and write a review -- positive or negative -- I believe an author needs to acknowledge the reader's/reviewer's effort.
To that end, a daily check of reviews should be part of a writer's regimen.
Russell
I think as an author (or any kind of artist) you have to accept that sometimes people will "miss the point." As readers, we come in with our own biases and sometimes see what we want to see or what we are paranoid about seeing. Either way, your work, if it has any depth at all, or sometimes even if it doesn't, will eventually take on a life of its own based on people's interpretations. For example, Twilight can be seen as a story of a submissive woman willing to risk her soul on an infatuation OR an ode to abstinence and redemption. High Noon was conceived by liberal filmmakers as an allegory for McCarthyism and became accepted by both sides of the political spectrum as a story of a man who stands up for what's right no matter the cost. Tolkien spent a lot of energy denying that LotR was an allegory for politics of his day. The point is, frustrating as it is, you as an artist have no control over people's perceptions. Just write the best story you can and let the reviews roll- good, bad, indifferent, perceptive, stupid- it all comes with the territory, and in a way it's all good.
Masha,Agreed. 100%.
Thanks for the timely contribution.
Russell
Lou,That's actually pretty funny.
Well, as the olde Romans used to say, "de gustibus non est disputandum" ("There's no accounting for taste.")
And, in this same context, I suppose we could observe that "one man's rainstorm is another man's umbrella sale."
Russell
I personally see no point in doing negative reviews. Usually in my case, I will just tell an author what I found to be a major obstacle in the book reaching its goal (being enjoyable, disturbing, informative, etc). If the author says that they'll fix it, then I hold off on reviewing until the fix was made. If the author says they refuse to fix it because I'm stupid and my ideas are stupid (therefore, the reader should be aware that the author is not very sensitive to their wants), then I post a statement that acknowledges what doesn't work about the book and why some readers might not mind it. If an author acknowledges what I say and just disagrees with my suggestion, then I don't review at all at any point.I think reviews that offer emotions or very emotional reactions are stupid. Just plain and simple. I think bloggers who do those kind of reviews are misguided at best. As for customer reviews, you know, those kind of reviews come with the territory. Customers aren't expected to maintain some level of professionalism; they're the consumers. If they want to post a 1-star review of the book because the author uses the word "of" in the first sentence, that's their right. Most people won't take it seriously, so I don't see it as being any real harm.
Lou wrote: "The only memorable argument my mother and I ever had was over the movie version of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's nest. To her the hero of the story was nurse Ratched."This is so interesting. If the movie is seen as an allegory for societal control vs. the individual, it could be a litmus test for the viewer's worldview. That's why it's great art.
Good point, Masha. I never thought of it that way (quite possibly, because I thought Nurse Ratchet was simply a fascist).Russell
Russell wrote: "Good point, Masha. I never thought of it that way (quite possibly, because I thought Nurse Ratchet was simply a fascist).Russell"
Yeah but... These are people who are incapable of taking care of themselves. They are her responsibility. She does what needs to be done to keep control. Everyone is OK with it, comfortable, secure, almost happy. Until someone asserts his individuality. Then everything falls apart.
Understood.And yet -- at least to my way of thinking, a fascist.
Russell
Feedback is feedback, good or bad. If you only get good reviews you'll never grow as a writer. If you only get negative.......well then......something is wrong.
Ashley,Yes and no. There are times when a reviewer is just a careless reader. In that case, no review is better than a slipshod review.
Russell
I'm curious, how is one a careless reader?
There's certainly no point in slamming the reviewer. "Well-behaving authors" know that. At the same time, it's never pleasant to read a review that, by its very content, makes it clear that your work was entirely misunderstood.
My question, then, is the following: Do you think your work is ultimately better served by a bad review (as I've described "bad" above) or by no review at all?
All serious responses to this question are welcome.
Russell