Nothing makes authors happier than having their books reviewed thoughtfully by attentive readers. Nothing make authors cringe more than crappy reviews by people who don't know how to review a book. A poorly written review is worse than useless, since it may ascribe a rating to a book that doesn't warrant either the pedestal or the pillory. The worst possible reviews hang laurels (or cow pats) on the book for things not related to the book itself: the price, the DRM, the merchants who carry it. A properly written review will communicate to potential readers of the book. It should say three things:
1. What the author was trying to do. A Western drama featuring a gunslinger bent on revenge is trying to achieve certain things in the adventure vein. These will be different than the goals of a book about a 12 year old girl, orphaned by smallpox and shipped across seas to live with a uncle in the West Indies colonies. For either of these (or for any other book), if the expected tropes and forms are being turned askew, that's very important to know. At the very least, your review should say what the book is about. If the point of that Western is to show how the love of a good woman can mend the gunslinger's broken soul, the potential reader need to know that.
2. How well the author succeeded. This is where your opinions start to come in. Does the book work? Without giving away any more of the plot than is necessary to make your qualitative assessment, was the author able to tell a convincing story? Were there jarring plot elements, bad dialog, incongruities, or other mechanical features that made the book fall short of the author's intent? If the author wanted to convey atmosphere and existential angst, then elements of loss and grief are perfectly suitable outcomes. However, they would be a complete failure in a book that was supposed to deliver action and adventure. If you can't tell how well the author succeeded because it's not at all clear what the author was really trying to do with the book, say so.
3. Your opinion of the book's value. The author set out to do something and succeeded (or failed) to some extent. Is it worth the reader's time to come along for the ride? Are some parts of the book good enough to offset the weaker parts? Is there one aspect that is so egregious that the whole book should be skipped? The cover, the typography, the layout, and other related matters deal with the reading experience should be dealt with here. While #1 and #2 are just about the book being reviewed, this is a place where you as the reviewer can put this book in context with other books, or with movies, TV show or other storytelling devices. If the book is derivative or overly reminiscent of Sherlock Holmes, Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Confederacy of Dunces, say so. Some readers will be put off by that, others might find that a argument in favor.
Remember: reviews are written for potential readers, NOT to make the author feel good (or bad) about what he/she has written.
===== Feel free to comment on this or any other post.
1. What the author was trying to do. A Western drama featuring a gunslinger bent on revenge is trying to achieve certain things in the adventure vein. These will be different than the goals of a book about a 12 year old girl, orphaned by smallpox and shipped across seas to live with a uncle in the West Indies colonies. For either of these (or for any other book), if the expected tropes and forms are being turned askew, that's very important to know. At the very least, your review should say what the book is about. If the point of that Western is to show how the love of a good woman can mend the gunslinger's broken soul, the potential reader need to know that.
2. How well the author succeeded. This is where your opinions start to come in. Does the book work? Without giving away any more of the plot than is necessary to make your qualitative assessment, was the author able to tell a convincing story? Were there jarring plot elements, bad dialog, incongruities, or other mechanical features that made the book fall short of the author's intent? If the author wanted to convey atmosphere and existential angst, then elements of loss and grief are perfectly suitable outcomes. However, they would be a complete failure in a book that was supposed to deliver action and adventure. If you can't tell how well the author succeeded because it's not at all clear what the author was really trying to do with the book, say so.
3. Your opinion of the book's value. The author set out to do something and succeeded (or failed) to some extent. Is it worth the reader's time to come along for the ride? Are some parts of the book good enough to offset the weaker parts? Is there one aspect that is so egregious that the whole book should be skipped? The cover, the typography, the layout, and other related matters deal with the reading experience should be dealt with here. While #1 and #2 are just about the book being reviewed, this is a place where you as the reviewer can put this book in context with other books, or with movies, TV show or other storytelling devices. If the book is derivative or overly reminiscent of Sherlock Holmes, Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Confederacy of Dunces, say so. Some readers will be put off by that, others might find that a argument in favor.
Remember: reviews are written for potential readers, NOT to make the author feel good (or bad) about what he/she has written.
===== Feel free to comment on this or any other post.
A review should also disclose any affiliation with the author. All too often, start-off reviews and high ratings are provided by the writer's friends and are based more on friendship than the actual quality of the work. This becomes a reciprocal practice which tends to compromise the integrity of the review process. Do you agree?
ReplyDeleteFinancial relationships should certainly be disclosed. As for "the author is a friend of mine, so 5 stars", a review that goes into the book as described above should eliminate that as a factor. Reviewers that are predisposed to be generous would still have to say what exactly they liked about that book, as would reviewers predisposed to negativity.
DeleteThis is good. I'm a top reviewer for Amazon (currently ranked around 600), though I'm probably going to start cutting back on book reviews because of some changes from Amazon. Anyway, one thing I've tried to do with book reviews is to say who the market for a book is for. Something akin to, "If you liked [such n such book] or [specific genre] then you should love this."
ReplyDeleteGood approach - that's the kind of thing that helps put the book in context for potential readers.
DeleteDammit, Tony! I had planned to blog about giving book reviews soon.
ReplyDeleteI suppose I still will, since I come at it from a different angle and with a different audience in mind. But now I'll feel weird about posting it after you.
Secondly, a minor point of contention. You wrote, "Nothing makes authors happier than having their books reviewed thoughtfully by attentive readers." One might argue that a large royalty check would make them even happier. Though, since I have no experience with either, perhaps I am incorrect.
Good point about the cash. I've gotten good reviews and royalty checks; each brings a distinct kind of joy. I can think of a dozen things that would also bring joy, ranging from pleasures of the mind to pleasures of the flesh.
DeleteYou could always write up your piece and let me serve it up here as a guest blog post. I'm always up for a cogent and thoughtful counterpoint.
I will keep this in mind when writing my next review- thanks!
ReplyDelete