What's In A Review?
If there were hard and fast rules on what to put in a review, I could pretty much guarantee that this, and many other similar posts, by many other bloggers and page admins, would be as interesting as the piece of fluff I've just noticed on my desk.
Authors come across as a fickle bunch, often accused of chasing perfect reviews and hounding those who offer criticism above praise. It has to be said, I can testify to this, having been pursued relentlessly for once leaving a 2-star review.
Did this particularly bother me? Well, not from the point of view that I had given detailed feedback, and even offered to assist the author by providing a set of editing notes.
However, as someone who always aims to offer the best reviews possible, it really did bother me that any author would go to the lengths that this particular one did.
As it turned out, the ire directed at me was due to my giving a 4-star review to a book he had read and hated. Apparently it is unethical to write a review based on your 'personal' opinion.
And that, unfortunately, is the crux of the problems some people have with reviews...
Whether you like it or not, a review is the personal opinion of the reader. Always has been, always will be. I do not expect to enjoy every book I read; in the same way I would be stunned if every review of my own books were a glowing recommendation.
Equally however, if I read and review a book, I do tend to state what I did and did not like. Too often, I see reviews that say "Didn't finish this - 1 star." or in one case "Bought this because of the raving reviews, but I've now read some of the more accurate 1-star reviews so I won't be bothering to read it. 1 star!"
Surely, if you read a book and hate it, then you have genuine justification for your low rating. Likewise, if you enjoy the book, you rate accordingly. But if you choose not to read the book, or if some random spelling error in the opening pages causes you to refuse to read on, what genuine right do you have to offer a review?
Some time ago, I purchased a sci-fi epic book, based upon the blurb alone. It sounded my kind of thing.
I have made four attempts to get into this book. In my humble opinion, the writing is disjointed and confusing, the storyline impossible to grasp and the narrative over-complicated and extremely boring.
Have I reviewed this book? No. Because I have read a grand total of 8% of it. How am I to know that my next effort won't take me to a point in the story where all becomes clear, where the writing is flawless and flowing?
In short, I don't; so why condemn a book based on that small section? Admittedly, the whole book could be like that. But until I feel I am in a position to offer a valid, valuable judgement on the entire work (or at least a very large percentage of it) I will not be posting a review.
As an author, I love seeing new reviews for my books. Good or bad, they are an acknowledgement that someone has taken the time to read my writing and has an opinion to offer.
I, too, have had a review from a man who read just 12 pages of my debut book. I used the word 'sh!t' in a line of dialogue, earning me a scathing 1-star review from a reader who 'despised profanity'. Fair enough, but if he had read on through the 115,000 other words, he would have found only 4 other instances of the same word; each used in carefully selected context.
I edited the entire book to remove them anyway, and offered the reader a free copy to read. I won't even try to describe the e-mail I received in response, but for a man who despised profanity, he has a natural calling to the discipline.
So, yes... a review is a valid personal opinion and there are no hard and fast rules as to whether you have to agree with them... and thus we come to comments and voting.
After writing a review, it is nice to see when some people agree with it, so it makes sense to me that Amazon, etc have the facility available for you to vote for reviews that you like.
But, is there really anything to be gained from being able to downvote reviews?
Personally, if the system is used properly, then yes, I think it helps those who do read the reviews get an idea of the popularity of the book.
Let's be honest here for a moment, wake-up-and-smell-the-coffee sort of thing. More often than not, the votes correspond to the reviewer and not the review. As much as I like to hope that my reviews are upvoted because I have provided an informative review, I am not so naiive as to think they are all there for that reason... and with some authors, the downvotes appear almost instantly on any favourable review of their work.
Being able to comment openly on reviews is, in my opinion, a ridiculous idea. Most authors never respond to reviews - and take my word for it, even a simple 'thank you' can be pounced upon. So just sit back and smile, or frown, in silence.
I've watched full-blown verbal warfare grow from the simplest of reviews and whether or not that review was deserved or accurate, it only served to engage more anger towards what may have been an unsuspecting author.
The saying used to go, 'If you can't say something nice, say nothing.' but now I'm almost certain it goes, 'If you can't say something nice, make sure you drag everyone else down with you.'
At the risk of insulting your intelligence, I shall leave you with this...
You don't have to like everything you read. You aren't obliged to agree with every shining review, or every condemnation.
SOME authors (no, not all) put a lot of effort into their work, and while I wholeheartedly agree that there can often be a gap in the quality offered and that which the more seasoned reader demands, I have seen both sides.
Gone are the days when publishing houses actively sought out the best of the best. Modern publishing revolves around the necessity of turnover. The dreaded bottom line.
You only have to look as far as '50 Shades of Whatever-that-was', for an example of a multi-million selling work that should never, ever, ever have made it past the first proof-read. The reviewers turned out in their droves to trash it and cast E L James as a half-baked wannabe with the writing talent and morals of a mudbrick.
Do you think she was bothered? Even if she was, she always had her bank statement to cheer her up.
Reviewers do not make concerted efforts to wind you up. Either you agree with their opinion or you don't. If you are foolish enough to rise to the more ridiculous reviews, don't be surprised when you end up looking foolish.
Before I leave you, to address the issue of the piece of fluff which now seems fixed into my field of vision, a quick note to the authors out there...
Never pay for reviews. By all means actively seek them, but never pay... In the meantime, if you genuinely hope to improve... get reading!
