Petra X > Status Update

I like both but prefer opinion. What a book taught me is probably not what it will teach you, and isn't that still mostly opinion of what it teaches? :)

Not sure how you could write a review without opinions!

Strange request. Plenty of books don’t teach me anything, but I enjoy them anyway. Or I don’t, but still have an opinion about them. If I could, I would ask this person whether they learn something from every book they read, as well as the types of books they read, etc. Maybe they’re reading a lot of self-help or professional books?

I was reading a thread about personal reviews on another social media site a few days ago, and was astounded at how many people insisted that reviews should be completely unbiased, and focused on describing literary elements like plot, setting, theme. There were also people who believed that if you couldn't give a book 5 stars, you should simply not rate it, because to do otherwise is mean. I guess I'm even older and more out of touch than I thought I was! My reviews are always going to be full of my opinions, and I'm not going to skip rating/reviewing if it's not a 5 star book.

@Linda -- I guess what those people want is a book report, not a review. On the other hand, some of us have been out of middle school for a few years and have grown past that.

It's one thing for a profile to say what one uses GR for and what sort of accounts one connects with. But dictating how other people write their reviews seems a step further.

I don't really understand the distinction the person is making anyway. If I've learnt anything, it will probably show in how I express my opinion, and I have no interest in writing reviews that don't express my opinion (or reading overly-detached and clinical reviews or book reports by other people).

Opinions with the exception of self-help books, where notes on content help me decide whether the book is for me (usually not;-)

People should write whatever they want on their review that happens to be on their personal page. No one should tell anyone what to do. That being said, I personally like to both read and write a combination of both as one leads to the other.

Shawnie wrote: "I like both but prefer opinion. What a book taught me is probably not what it will teach you, and isn't that still mostly opinion of what it teaches? :)"

In a non-fiction book, it teaches facts, although I suppose it is the reviewer's opinion of whether those facts are important and worth discussing whether they end up in the review or not.

Opinions rather than what the reviewer learnt. But my reviews are sometimes about what the book reminds me of or makes me think about rather than learning something. Sometimes I like to play in my reviews too so maybe they are neither!

My favorite reviews tend to be those in which the person doing it is full of opinions and observations. I would much rather read a review where someone makes a keen observation or relates to something random that happened to them. If I want to read a staid review, I can also read the Wikipedia page or check out a newspaper review.

Petra semi-hiatus as jumping up for carnival wrote: "In a non-fiction book, it teaches facts,..."

A non-fiction book can also be an opinion. Or a speculation.

if I'm following you, I'm doing it because I'm interested in your opinion! But if you learned something, that's good too!

I do not care what people write about if they're writing interesting stuff. It does help if the book interests me, for good or ill.

Linda wrote: "I was reading a thread about personal reviews on another social media site a few days ago, and was astounded at how many people insisted that reviews should be completely unbiased, and focused on d..."

Author Giovanna Pompele: “I think some people believe they are doing genuine literary criticism and that it is important for authors to get honest feedback, that they’ll appreciate it. I think it comes from a place of disconnect with the author as a human being and a visceral relation to the work. Some readers take their reading very seriously and invest a lot of time and thought in it. I think they relate to authors as peers, even to the point of thinking that their negative comment will help authors.”

How presumptuous of us think we are author's equals and our critical reviews might actually be worth taking seriously.

This author once went after a 4-star reviewer.

If I may be so presumptuous:

Dear (late) Author Giovanna Pompele:

It is important for authors to get feedback on their writing, but they should do so before they publish. After that, they should shut up. Reviews are for readers; they are not critiques for the author.

Sincerely,

EDITED TO ADD: I should have done more research. Not only is Pompele deceased, but she is not the one who went after the reviewer; she herself was apparently the reviewer who tagged another author on Twitter with the explanation for the 4-star review.

(link to original 2019 article on Slate dot com not allowed)

It's not an either/or for me. It's best when information and opinion are thoughtfully integrated.

I guess it's a way to think differently about books and what we get out of them. Obviously non-fiction potentially offers an opportunity to be taught, but for fiction … well, let's just say I don't read Parker novels to learn how to pull off a heist, or Moby Dick to learn about whaling. Point being, not every book has a lesson, and I don't think that makes it less valuable an experience. If a book offers nothing but pure escapism and entertainment, that’s still great.

Anyway, to answer the question, for me, the point of any review is to answer a few fundamental questions: Is this book something I would want to read? Will it be worth the time and effort? If that includes “teachable” moments, fine, but even those are opinions in a sense, as other readers may not get the same “lessons”, or may have already known that particular thing – it’s subjective, in other words.

Phil wrote: "Not sure how you could write a review without opinions!"

The quote on the profile came from someone whose main genre was selfhelp, so maybe easier on that than fiction or most non-fiction.

I don't ever listen to/read 'self-help'. Otherwise, like you, I prefer opinions every time!

Petra is not feeling GR so much, needs more cats wrote: "The quote on the profile came from someone whose main genre was selfhelp..."

Aha. That makes more sense, but it still seems rather didactic.

Richard wrote: "I do not care what people write about if they're writing interesting stuff. It does help if the book interests me, for good or ill."

Agreed, Richard.

But the question has lead to a very interesting discussion, Petra.
I enjoy discussions that focus on any aspect of reviewing and book-related-opinion-giving.
There's one kind of book-related opinion that makes me laugh though: it's when the reviewer ticks off a character, accusing them for what they do in a novel. They're just characters, I shriek in my head, the author needs them to act like that for the purposes of the story!
Reviewers often make me smile too with their opinions about endings. Apart from saying we find it satisfying or not, we don't get to decide how a book finishes—that's entirely for the author.
Speaking of smiling, I always do, Petra, when I see your latest name tag pop up in my feed somewhere. I really hope you're keeping a record of them all and that someday you add them to your profile maybe, in the right chronological order. It would make quite a story.

Fionnuala wrote: "... There's one kind of book-related opinion that makes me laugh though: it's when the reviewer ticks off a character, accusing them for what they do in a novel. They're just characters, I shriek in my head, the author needs them to act like that for the purposes of the story!..."

If there were no bad, evil, or despicable characters, the good ones wouldn't seem so good and the stories would be too dull to bother with! There are nasty people in the world and there's plenty of horrendous stuff in the Bible, including by God and prophets! For me, it depends if the overall arc condones, rewards, or even admires the bad things they do.

Do you prefer opinions or to read what the reviewer learned from the book?

Opinion, of course.
Though now I want to leave a comment on one of their reviews, where I dress my opinion up as a "lesson learned". I wonder if that'd seem annoying. Fingers crossed for yeah... 😈

Petra is not feeling GR so much, needs more cats wrote: "Some readers take their reading very seriously and invest a lot of time and thought in it."

The audacity! So I'm guessing, we should all just skim books, and do vague hand gestures when asked if we liked it or not?

"I think some people believe they are doing genuine literary criticism and that it is important for authors to get honest feedback, that they’ll appreciate it."

I was going to comment something sarcastic here, but I actually found the slate article where this is referenced, and in THAT context I frankly agree.
It's one thing to write a critical review of a book, where you air your grievances, but tagging (e.g. on Twitter) the author feels kind of petty and intentionally adversarial. As if you're baiting them.

I mean,,, we inject our opinion into everything. And what you take away from the book often depends on a multitude of things but you're reading from your positionality/perspective, so naturally your take-aways from a particular book may vary even if you end up agreeing on things.

I will always take opinion because I think it's more interesting. For me, I follow/friend a person because of their writing *and* opinions on a particular book since sometimes I may have no interest in reading that book.

Ellen the Herbivore wrote: "Maybe they’re reading a lot of self-help or professional books?..."

My bad. I should have made that clear. Their favourite genre was Selfhelp, but I didn't check their shelves. Selfhelp is a favourite genre in my shop. All I learned from it over the years is that it is the same people in the same jobs buying the books, and the only people who really get 'helped' are the authors, some of them get very rich writing variations on a theme that might not even be theirs.

I prefer opinions, though sometimes the other part sufficed me.

Cecily wrote: "If there were no bad, evil, or despicable characters, the good ones wouldn't seem so good and the stories would be too dull to bother with! There are nasty people in the world and there's plenty of horrendous stuff in the Bible, including by God and prophets! For me, it depends if the overall arc condones, rewards, or even admires the bad things they do.."

Agreed, Cecily—but the part about the overall arc seeming to condone 'bad' things sends us into serious judgement territory, don't you think? Your notion of what's bad and my notion of what's bad might be different, and the author's different again. Take Claudia Piñero's Elena Knows for example. Piñero condones abortion in that book. In fact accepting a person's right to an abortion is the crux around which the rest of the story elements are set. Claudia Piñero needed the make her point about abortion in order for her overall theme related to Parkinson's to make sense. If I were anti abortion, I would need to set my personal opinions aside in order to do justice to the cleverness of Piñero's book in a review.
This opinion business is tricky, isn't it—but that's just my opinion:-)

Fionnuala wrote: "... Your notion of what's bad and my notion of what's bad might be different, and the author's different again. Take Claudia Piñero's Elena Knows for example. Piñero condones abortion in that book...."

Of course. But I think there's a difference between something like serial-killing, that I hope everyone thinks is bad in pretty much all circumstances, and a subject like abortion, where there's a wide range of... opinion.

But think of Lolita which gets a lot of negative opinions posted about it when instead a reader needs to set aside their personal opinion about an adult sexually exploiting a twelve-year-old, and examine instead how well the book is written...

Fionnuala wrote: "But think of Lolita which gets a lot of negative opinions posted about it when instead a reader needs to set aside their personal opinion about an adult sexually exploiting a twelve-year-old, and examine instead how well the book is written."

Putting aside an adult grooming and repeatedly raping a pre-teen child is easier for some to put aside than others. Nevertheless, I agree it's brilliantly written - disturbingly so. I also think it's clear that Humbert is a thoroughly dishonest narrator and that Nabokov is not condoning him.

Heart wrote: "If I may be so presumptuous:
Dear (late) Author Giovanna Pompele: ..."

That was a lot more information than on the website I quoted from. Thank you!

Cecily wrote: "...I agree it's brilliantly written - disturbingly so. I also think it's clear that Humbert is a thoroughly dishonest narrator and that Nabokov is not condoning him..."

Yes, it was clever on Nabokov's part to make Humbert unreliable. But I seem to remember that between the very moral-sounding Foreword and the very differently-toned Afterword it was hard to tell exactly where Nabokov himself stood. Hmm...

Cecily wrote: "It's one thing for a profile to say what one uses GR for and what sort of accounts one connects with. But dictating how other people write their reviews seems a step further. ..."

Self-appointed GR police. The ones who tell us not to review books we haven't read (as if they could prove who has read anything), not to rate books below 4 star because it hurts the authors trying to sell their babies, not to express opinions that disagree with theirs, to write reviews about the book not personal stories, that those of us without lived experience shouldn't be critiquing a book (ok, that's my latest ex-friend turned troll) etc etc.

Petra is not feeling GR so much, needs more cats wrote: "(ok, that's my latest ex-friend turned troll)...."

Whew! Glad I'm not the only one with a few of those in my "lived experience" . . . . .

Petra and those quoting Giovanna Pompele and the slate article, please allow me to set the record straight.

Gio was my girlfriend and my partner, who I met here on goodreads and who, as you point out Heart DeCoupeville, we lost almost exactly a year ago. From that POV, I feel compelled to say that your original comment, Petra, is based on a misreading, and your correction, Heart, doesn't go far enough and still leaves an incorrect impression for those who do not read the slate article.

Gio was asked to comment on the issues raised by Makkai's 'author-tagging' twitter thread as a person active on literary twitter (not an author, a reader/reviewer) who had once, mistakenly and with deep regret, tagged an author (and this on a 4-star review; hardly negative!)

Following Makkai's thread, as she says in the slate piece, Gio then engaged deeply in thinking about the reader's responsibility to the author when reviewing.

Gio was a profoundly generous reader, hugely supportive of authors and of other readers who wanted to engage with books, with writing. Many of you here on this thread or seeing this thread will have interacted with her -- she was very active on goodreads. You will know the acuity of her analysis and, under that, her kindness and compassion.

Gio would have been the first to say that her opinion, her reviews, are merely that: an opinion. And that everyone is entitled to write a review on whatever grounds they choose -- but, as she says in slate, that does not mean people are entitled to discount or fail to recognize the humanity of the author, the fact that there is a real person behind the words on the page.

Gio's own practice became to *never* write a negative review of a book by a living author. If she didn't like a book for whatever reason, however well-founded she believed it to be, she simply wouldn't rate it at all. (As we have probably all seen on twitter, even 4-star reviews have been perceived by authors as negative). This may have been an over-reaction in some respects but it came from a place of great empathy for authors.

Final point: I guess this thread and these comments are another lesson in how even an indirect tag of someone whose words are being scrutinized by a stranger, especially if premised on unfounded assumptions, can be hurtful.

Thanks for listening.

I think each reviewer's message is personal and interesting. I like opinions and I am interested in what you learn. I don't tend to write that though. Lately I have reading time but no real time for reviews. That will change and maybe I will go back and add more reviews. I also find I learn a lot from fiction. Even the light fiction I am reading right now. I appreciate what all of you put into the reviews. I hope to give back in the future.

Heart wrote: "Whew! Glad I'm not the only one with a few of those in my "lived experience"

I got that on Guest House for Young Widows: Among the Women of ISIS. Because I'm not a Muslim I wouldn't be able to understand the constant Islamophobia in the UK (and therefore what made the girls run away to join ISIS). That limits the number of people who are qualified to review the book then. But surely books are there to expand our horizons and it is the job of the author, in a non-fiction book, to do just that?

Jennifer (formerly Eccentric Muse) wrote: "Gio was my girlfriend and my partner, who I met here on goodreads and who, as you point..."

I am sorry for your loss and read your comment with interest. All of us who read articles in the media are at the mercy of the writer and their agenda. It's not only what they quote, but how they frame that quote. So it's always interesting to read a viewpoint from someone who knew the person or was there at the time. Thank you.

As an individual reader and reviewer -- who may or may not also be a writer or an academic -- I believe my empathy and obligation to share an honest opinion belong to the multitude of fellow readers with whom I have much more direct or indirect contact via my reviews than I would ever have with the single or very small group of writers who have written any particular book. If that means my negative review is hurtful to the writer(s), so be it. They put that work out for public consumption and by implication for public comment. If their feelings can't handle my criticism, they should not read it. It's never intended for them anyway.

As unpopular as my opinion may be, claiming a reviewer who refuses to give any negative review does so out of generosity for the writer seems disingenuous. "I do not want to hurt the author's feelings by telling anyone else how really rotten I think this book is, even though the author may never see that review, and even though the readers whose trust I have tried to build may spend time and money on a work that I believe is not worth it. I will lie by omission rather than hurt a writer's feelings." To me, that sets up writers as a class as something far more precious and valuable -- and human? -- and more worthy of emotional protection than mere readers, and I could not disagree more strenuously.

I will always, whether as reader, reviewer, academic, or writer, side with readers. Always.

Heart wrote: "As unpopular as my opinion may be, claiming a reviewer who refuses to give any negative review does so out of generosity for the writer seems disingenuous. "I do not want to hurt the author's feelings by telling anyone else how really rotten I think this..."

People who refuse to review books, especially ARCs less than positively do the book trade harm. I used to buy a lot of self-published books for my bookshop based on their glowing reviews. There is a time lag of up to a month for me to get books because I live on a small island where everything is not just shipped to, but transhipped from another island. Since I ship four times a month this was a lot of books. A lot of money. I did it for a few months.

So many of the hyped-up books were disliked and my customers were saying were a waste of money. So I stopped selling self-published authors altogether.

I am wondering if this is what happened with other booksellers and is what has led to so few of them being published as print books available on Ingram (the major distributors of English-language books in the world) and just appearing as Kindle or PoD on Amazon?

(I do have arc reviewers in my friends list who are completely honest (that's why they are my friends) but although their reviews are a good guideline, they don't affect the overall rating (always over 4, often over 4.5) from all the gushing reviews that usually appear at the top and are on book blogs, Facebook etc as these reviewers of freebies aim to please their author 'friends'.)

Petra is not feeling GR so much, needs more cats wrote: "I am wondering if this is what happened with other booksellers and is what has led to so few of them being published as print books available on Ingram (the major distributors of English-language books in the world) and just appearing as Kindle or PoD on Amazon? ..."

"The book trade," as you call it, exists for readers. Without readers (or reviewers, for that matter), writers can still write, but without readers, publishers have nowhere to (profitably) dispose of their product. The printing press led to expanded literacy, not the other way around. Publishing remains a business, as the KKR purchase of S&S demonstrates.

All a discerning reader has to do is actually read a few of the author-published offerings in popular fiction to recognize how generally dreadful they are. There are sufficient freebies for anyone to select several digital editions at no cost other than the time and stomach acid it takes to suffer through a few representative pages. Then read the 1-star reviews.

That's fiction, however, which is a different game from informational non-fiction -- science, history, biography, etc. With very rare exceptions, I wouldn't pay a farthing for a work of author-published non-fiction. If it's from an author with stellar professional credentials, I might consider it, but it's been my experience those are few and far between. Personal narratives are a category unto themselves; buyer discretion is advised. 😁

All of the above is, of course, only my personal opinion. Every reader has the right to their own, as well as the right to review or not review. I may express my views, but I will never tell another reader or reviewer what to read, how to read, or how to review.

Heart wrote: ""The book trade," as you call it, exists for readers..."

I'm not sure what you meant by that, and obviously you meant something more than the business I work in.

I feel like either is pretty subjective--different people can learn different things from the same book! Very interesting question, haven't seen that one before lol.

I definitely lean toward the way it made me feel and my opinion. I read mostly fiction so it would probably be a different answer if most books I read were non fiction.

Petra is not feeling GR so much, needs more cats wrote: "Heart wrote: ""The book trade," as you call it, exists for readers..."

I'm not sure what you meant by that, and obviously you meant something more than the business I work in."

Actually, no, I didn't mean anything more. I wanted to reference and emphasize your well-chosen phrase for it and include not just the selling of books but the publishing of them as well. If anything else was to be taken from it, it might be the contrast to the "art" of writing, which I do intend to be taken slightly facetiously. 😁

Luís wrote: "I prefer opinions, though sometimes the other part sufficed me."

I'm happy with a review that is a personal opinion of a book. It's more likely to tell me if I might want to read it than a detailed synopsis, but I like those ones too.

Bloodorange wrote: "Opinions with the exception of self-help books, where notes on content help me decide whether the book is for me (usually not;-)"

The guy who wrote the quote did reference SelfHelp as his favourite genre. But even with selfhelp books it is good to know whether the book is enjoyable, if the suggestions seem practical and any personal anecdotes relating to the subject or advice.

I am unlikely to become book friends with someone who wants to tell me how I should review books. I realize that I'm not explicitly answering your original question; but I write the reviews I write. If someone likes that style, great. If they don't, befriend or follow another reviewer. Each reader is free to prefer one style or another, but it's obnoxious for them to convert their preference into the equivalent of a one-right-way, Review StyleGuide.

Debbie Y wrote: "People should write whatever they want on their review that happens to be on their personal page. No one should tell anyone what to do..."

Lots of people do though. I was just reading an author blog (not on GR) saying that the people who left reviews that went to more than five lines didn't do her any favours. The shorter the reviews, the more of them people would read.