Review Group discussion

I have received a two-star review in this Group and also handed out a few. When I do a 'tough' review, I try to point out the major issues that I feel created problems that need to be addressed - usually plot holes, poor research, terrible editing, and a combination of factors. I don't rate a book low just because I don't usually read the genre; I try to look at the quality of the writing, the flow, characterizations, pacing, etc. I also try to point it out if I feel the ideas are good and where I think the book could go on re-write.

The poor review I got did go into quite a bit of detail about why he didn't like what he'd read, and I appreciated his feedback. However, he did not contact me, nor did he link to the review as required in this Group. So I went a while thinking I just hadn't gotten the review before I found it myself. I was more perturbed that he hadn't said anything about putting it up than I was about the actual review itself!

Nobody's work is going to appeal to everybody, and many reviewers rate on gut feelings rather than technical merit. So your friend shouldn't be discouraged; there are tons of reasons for low reviews, including the reviewer's own interpretation of the star system.

Oh, thanks for the info on Jason's book! Going there now...

Two stars? I once gave an author three stars (and that was being very kind) as well as some serious concerns about her work and where she was going wrong with her plot. Her response was to write me a very nasty and childish email. I take all the critism I get very seriously and actually look forward to it - because a glowing review doesn't help you improve your skills. The bad ones do. I'm not sure why this writer doesn't see it that way also and have now been a little less likely to do reviews in the future. What would be the point if I'm just going to get yelled at and my advice is ignored completely. Ho hum.

True. I don't particularly enjoy Game of Thrones or Hunger Games, despite their popularity and the fact that they are well-edited. But I'll rave over The Lies of Locke Lamora. Personal taste plays a lot into enjoyment of the book. When I'm looking for a read, I usually read the middle-of-the-road reviews anyway, since they seem to be the best thought-out and most detailed. I skip the 5-stars and 1-stars altogether.

I've only given out one two-star review and I had a lot of reasons for it (I'm reserving 1-star for books that are outright offensive, because even if I think a book isn't good there's a difference between "poorly edited/plotted/written" and "grotesque", and I wouldn't feel right putting them at the same level).
I've received a couple three stars. Some of the feedback I got on my first book has changed how I'm formatting my second book. Nothing horrible, just minor adjustments, and I'm glad people said something.

I honestly think that for the most part I pretty much agreed with everything people have said in reviews for my book. I don't think I've gotten one where I was didn't understand where they were coming from.

Besides, if all you have are 5-star reviews, it looks suspicious.

I personally review differently on GR to elsewhere, and there is a very simple reason for this. On Amazon it simply asks for stars out of five. Three stars is therefore an average review, 2 less, 1 least, etc.

However for GR there are little prompts over the stars. Three stars is "I liked it", two stars is "It's OK" and one star is "I did not like it"

I am a logical and also pedantic person. I might rate a book three stars on Amazon because it is OK, but on Goodreads it would only get two stars because I could not feel that I was saying I liked it. On Goodreads, for me, only a one star rating is actually a bad review.

I do often feel that I am not always as consistent as I could be in my reviews, but that is human nature: we are not machines churning out a result based on a scoring system methodically arrived at, we are giving our impression at the time of writing.

Two star reviews I received (two out of sixty):
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

One and two star reviews I gave to others:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

Elizabeth wrote: "Has any experienced this issue? Has the reviewer gone to great lengths to point out the mistakes in your novel in order to justify the rating? Did they contact you prior to posting?"

I tend to give good reasons (I think) for giving books low ratings, so you can show them to your friend to show that s/he shouldn't take it personally.
Also, I contacted Dawson and Stevens on the mistakes/flaws in their books. Dawson responded to one of my reviews, my responses are in the comment section of the reviews.

I also have a blog article on being a stickler for verisimilitude, which is a big influence on how I approach my 'negative' reviews.

I write reviews I would read. When the review is as long as the book and gives spoilers I get annoyed. I also try and let self published authors know privately that they have some technical issues. Quotes, paragraph line up, etc. I don't think that has a good deal to do with the story and self published authors might not have the resources to get a final proof reader. I am actually reading a book right now were the poor guy acknowledges three people for editing and there are limited paragraph breaks for quotes. I thought it was a conversion from word to PDF issue but he sent the mobi file and that has the same hiccups. I don't think this has anything to do with his story though. So I told him about the issues and will review the book on its other merits. I don't plan on checking back and re-reading the book so a review including that kind of thing will sit out there even after he fixes the issues.

K.w. wrote: "I write reviews I would read. When the review is as long as the book and gives spoilers I get annoyed. I also try and let self published authors know privately that they have some technical issues...."

That's a really good point about the editing issues. I do have a difficult time silencing my inner editor when reading poorly edited books--self pubs or not. However, I'm more likely to comment on grammar errors from the large publishing houses, because I expect more from them. They simply have more resources.

As long as the storyline is engaging, and the characters are well developed, I will give it a good review. I will let the author know about the errors via email or private messaging. Perhaps, the errors can and will be corrected in future editions.

But I can also see the points others made regarding poorly edited novels. It does detract from the overall reading experience. Yet, I'm not an English teacher, and my job isn't to grade someone's syntax, or verb tense. Besides, many readers won't notice... but some will. And that is where my conscience and ego get involved. For if I knowingly give four stars to a book that is riddled with grammar problems, and a reader clearly can see the errors, my reviews won't be worth much. Therein lies my dilemma--avoid discouraging authors, ignore their mistakes, and give them a good review, or provide an honest evaluation for the reader that might warn them away? I don't want to discourage authors, but I don't want to lie to readers...

Deidre wrote: "Therein lies my dilemma--avoiding ticking-off authors by ignoring their mistakes and giving them a good review, or providing an honest evaluation for the reader that might warn them away? I don't want to discourage authors, but I don't want to lie to readers..."

If you publish your content on a blog, you don't have to adhere to a certain standard. If you publish your content as an ebook, your ebook has to adhere to professional standards. The choice is easy.

Also, once you publish an ebook, you need to disengage from your personal feelings. The book is no longer 'your baby', but a product that needs to comply to the standards of that product. Professional cover and no formatting or editing mistakes that detract from the reading experience. If an author cannot handle criticism when their books fail to uphold that standard, they shouldn't publish in the first place.

A 'low' review and a 'bad' review are in the mind of the beholder. Two stars or less is a low review in my opinion - as long as the review points out issues with the book and writing.

To me a 'bad' review is that the reader just didn't like the book. The story was bad, didn't make sense, the characters were stupid or did things the reader didn't like. So be it. There's little an author can learn from that. Better to ignore. I've had several. And then there are the inane ones where the reader didn't like the fact I tend to have Asian females (Asian fetish), or too much sex and violence, and on and on. Those are just opinions and mean nothing.

A 'low' review because of grammar and spelling mistakes, poor or no research, technical errors in the content, plot holes, etc., is invaluable because the author can learn something and correct it. These aren't just opinions, they are facts. I recently gave two stars because the author used the same word and phrases over and over and over.

Martyn V. wrote: "Deidre wrote: "Therein lies my dilemma--avoiding ticking-off authors by ignoring their mistakes and giving them a good review, or providing an honest evaluation for the reader that might warn them ..."

I suppose it's my tender feelings and distaste for giving a negative review and not necessarily the author's--'hypothetical'--tender feelings that create the difficult choice. I don't enjoy giving bad news--no author intentionally writes a bad book.

I'm better able to take the criticism than give it. Is it ever easy to tell someone their work is heavily flawed? Should it be? I'm not sure I want to become hardened to the point that it becomes easy to expose the errors others make.

But I'll wholeheartedly agree that publishing warrants authors disentangle their personal feelings from their finished novels.

I'm not sure I agree, however, that if someone can't stomach criticism they shouldn't publish in the first place. Did we all enter into writing with organic thick skins?

I paint, as well as write. And so I have two worlds that demand thick skin if you wish to remain in those realms. But it takes time to build a skin thick enough to allow harsh criticism to bounce off one's back. We don't step into the world of writing and shut off our emotions.

But certainly, over time, we all learn the value of seeing our work as a product instead of a baby. And with that we let go - realizing that criticism can do more to improve our writing (and so can reading bad writing)than the highest praise could ever do. I'd say it's more of a maturation process or evolution. But I'd never tell someone to stay out of publishing if they can't stomach criticism. Maybe, I'd say instead, get used to it. :)

I've usually find people who give reviews give pretty good feedback. I haven't felt like I had any issues with people who have reviewed my books - they all make pretty good points.

I do, however, remember a review on another book that seemed a bit harsh.
It was a book all about demons and the demon world being connected to the human world and such. I thought it was a pretty decent book with fun characters and such.

I checked the book again later and noticed someone left it a 2 star review. It didn't seem so bad to me, so I was wondering what the other person didn't like about it.
As it turned out, they gave it two stars because they don't like demons. It seemed unduly harsh to give a book about demons 2 stars for having demons. I felt bad for the author since they only had a few reviews, so that 2 star made a big difference in their rating.

On the other hand, if people read the reviews they can decide how much value they place on that person's opinion.

http://horror.org/?p=6219

Public letter to CEO of Amazon from Horror Writers Association. Thought this was interesting since it is dealing with authors asking restraints be put on customers' reviews.

They're echoing the necessity of sticking to content, not spoiling the plot for others, avoiding personal attacks or comments about the author, among a few other requests. Good standard by which to review books?

I think the only reason reviews should be taken down is if it's just an attack on the author or some sort of harassment like that. It should be pretty extreme.

Some people don't like spoilers, but other people do like to read opinions about the spoilers, and it's probably far too unwieldy to expect Amazon to make sure people have actually read a book.

I got a one star review at iTunes that had one word, "No." I still laugh with pleasure when I think of that.

I still maintain that authors have no right to any say when it comes to reviews. They're written by readers for readers. If it's from a troll there's even more reason to ignore it, since the only reason trolls think such action is fun is because of the reactions they get.

Readers are canny enough to see which reviews are just reflecting badly on the reviewer, not the author. And since Amazon listings work on number of reviews, not rating, any review is good news.

Jay wrote: "I still maintain that authors have no right to any say when it comes to reviews. They're written by readers for readers. If it's from a troll there's even more reason to ignore it, since the only r..."

Jay, I don't write my reviews just for other readers, they are often directed specifically at the writer, especially if the book was a good book with a correctable flaw. I'm not going to take the time to discover how to contact the writer, so I leave the info in a review. If the writer reads it and uses it, good. If the writer never sees it? Well, that's not my problem.

I also include comments that hopefully will help the author, but that's not the primary purpose of a review. Reviews are for readers, critiques are for authors.

Jay wrote: "I still maintain that authors have no right to any say when it comes to reviews. They're written by readers for readers. If it's from a troll there's even more reason to ignore it, since the only r..."

I find the new revelation that the more reviews you get on Amazon help you, regardless of the rating, interesting, if a bit odd. Seems to be beneficial to the writer, but not necessarily for the reader. Good to know though! I guess it simply means your book is selling - even it might suck. :p

As far as I know there are 4 factors when it comes to listing order:
number of sales
number of reviews
number of 'likes'
number of agreements with the tags

So if you really want to help an author, don't forget to like and agree when you post that review.

Jay wrote: "As far as I know there are 4 factors when it comes to listing order:
number of sales
number of reviews
number of 'likes'
number of agreements with the tags

So if you really want to help an author,..."

Good to know... :)

Deidre wrote: "I'm not sure I agree, however, that if someone can't stomach criticism they shouldn't publish in the first place. Did we all enter into writing with organic thick skins?"

I think we should distinguish between writing and publishing. I think people should write what they want to write and if they want to consider it their baby, that's fine by me. However, if you want other people to read your work, there are several ways of not embarrassing yourself when you publish.

One pretty important step is getting feedback from dispassionate parties. Not your family and friends, who might coddle you and try to protect your feelings, but strangers who will study your work and give you feedback on how to improve.

Usually, this is done in the relative privacy of a writers group or critique circle, where you come to hone your skills. The work to be critiqued is not publishable yet, but with constructive criticism, you will get there, if you swallow hard and understand that these people are trying to help you improve, not squash your dreams.

What I found, and what I criticize, is authors who skip this important step and publish prematurely. It's not that their writing is awful or unpublishable, it's just 'not there yet'. But they publish it anyway, because their family and friends told them it was publishable.

Unless your family and friends are professional editors and willing to risk you going absolutely batshit crazy over opinions of your work, your friends and family are the last persons whose opinion you should value concerning your writing.

Many of the people who get their feelings hurt by reviews or fly into a rage about a reviewer 'not getting it' are writers who seek validation and praise.

Validation and praise are welcome and can certainly brighten your day, but unwarranted validation and praise only makes the fall from the pedestal much more painful.

Someone who is serious about the profession should treat publishing as professional as possible. And that requires, at the bare minimum, getting unbiased feedback from dispassionate readers. If possible, and affordable, they should get a professional editor to look at their work.

If someone wastes my time publishing something that nowhere near finished, they deserve all the criticism I give them. No matter if they offer their books for free or 99 cents. It's not about the money. It's about wasting my time and pretending to be something you're not.

I received a complaint about one of my 'negative' reviews. The author claimed that he didn't need to research because he wrote 'for entertainment purposes'.

Well, I was not entertained due to his lack of research.

If you want to be taken serious as an author, then act like a professional. No excuses, no whining, no tantrums.

Bravo, Martyn. Well said.

Even when the not-so-glowing reviews come, be grateful for them and suck it up. Then work to continually improve your writing.

Martyn V. wrote: "Deidre wrote: "I'm not sure I agree, however, that if someone can't stomach criticism they shouldn't publish in the first place. Did we all enter into writing with organic thick skins?"

I think we..."



I agree that reviews need to be objective, work needs to be edited, skin needs to be thickened, and one needs to be professional. But, since your reply quoted me, those facts didn't address my dilemma.

My conundrum is when I have to give the negative review, not when I receive the negative review.

So, with the agreed upon facts as our foundation... When you're responding to an author that has wasted your time, or you believe shouldn't be in the business because they didn't do enough research, exactly how would you say that in your review?


[Maybe that dilemma is for another thread.]

Deidre wrote: "Martyn V. wrote: "Deidre wrote: "I'm not sure I agree, however, that if someone can't stomach criticism they shouldn't publish in the first place. Did we all enter into writing with organic thick s..."

I would never say, "You shouldn't be in the business, because you didn't do enough research," but I might say, "Your book would have been a lot better if you had done some more research."

Stan wrote: "Deidre wrote: "Martyn V. wrote: "Deidre wrote: "I'm not sure I agree, however, that if someone can't stomach criticism they shouldn't publish in the first place. Did we all enter into writing with ..."

That sounds reasonable. :) Actually, after writing my last post, I came up with my own answer! But I still appreciate hearing how others deal with giving negative reviews. Criticism is a given, but how you say it matters, in my opinion.

I did a good deal of work on my book. I had several editors. I did a good bit of research and I am sure mistakes were made. This is my first attempt. I worked hard on this. But I am sure people looking for flaws will find them. I have read several books with questionable editing. I as a reader absolutely take into account what resources the writer had. Partly because I have seen the denigrating comments from the established book world about self published authors. that is why I take the time to let authors know they have a hiccup. I also let authors know via the review if they have a story issue..
There is a difference in my mind as a reader and as an author as to weather a grammatical issue wins the day. Should the author ignore my warning then they will et hit. But should they correct it and the story is strong I would hate to mark off and discourage a viable talent, just because I had more resources than they did.

I am pretty realistic about story though.

K.w. wrote: "I did a good deal of work on my book. I had several editors. I did a good bit of research and I am sure mistakes were made. This is my first attempt. I worked hard on this. But I am sure people loo..."

Ann Rice, who we all know is a successful writer, and in my opinion, a fabulous one, gave great advice to her fans on Facebook!

"...There are no rules! It's amazing how willing people are to tell you you aren't a real writer unless you conform to their cliches or their rules. My advice? Reject critics and rules out of hand. Define yourself. Do it your way. Make yourself the writer or your dreams. Protect your voice, your vision, your characters, your story, your imagination, your dreams." Ann Rice

She is quite successful and has no reason to tell another writer how to do something. It's no skin off her nose if you fail or succeed. It doesn't affect her work if you write beautifully or poorly. Keep people around you who will be honest, with tact, and not have it out for you. Successful writers, confident writers, won't need to tear you down to build themselves up. Your writing will ultimately succeed or fail on its own. But throughout the process - I will support other authors in trying to reach their goal - that doesn't mean lying to them, but it also doesn't mean destroying their dreams.

So, yeah, write an honest review - but remember - you were a beginner once too!

Deidre wrote: "So, with the agreed upon facts as our foundation... When you're responding to an author that has wasted your time, or you believe shouldn't be in the business because they didn't do enough research, exactly how would you say that in your review?"

I posted several links to negative reviews in post 11, where I address a lack of research or verisimilitude. I think I make it pretty clear that with a lifftle effort the book could've been much better.

Deidre wrote: "K.w. wrote: "I did a good deal of work on my book. I had several editors. I did a good bit of research and I am sure mistakes were made. This is my first attempt. I worked hard on this. But I am su..."

Well said Deidre.
I have never given a 1 star review. If the books that bad that I cant finish it I don't review it. If I see somethings wrong in the book I will point it out, but not in a way to be nasty. I have even gone as far as sending the author notes (if I have been asked to review the book).

I use the 'sandwich rule', as I think I've noted before in this thread: some good stuff, followed by the stuff that needs improvement, followed by an encouraging wrap-up.

Jay wrote: "As far as I know there are 4 factors when it comes to listing order:
number of sales
number of reviews
number of 'likes'
number of agreements with the tags

So if you really want to help an author,..."

I can't figure out where to 'like' or agree with tags.

Under each review there's a little button that says "was this review helpful to you?" That's basically the "Like" button.

Tags are gone from Amazon nowadays.

K.A. wrote: "I use the 'sandwich rule', as I think I've noted before in this thread: some good stuff, followed by the stuff that needs improvement, followed by an encouraging wrap-up."

That is a very good format. I'll try to remember it.

Judy wrote: "Under each review there's a little button that says "was this review helpful to you?" That's basically the "Like" button.

Tags are gone from Amazon nowadays."

Good grief - I hadn't even noticed the tags had gone lol! And the like button - well that used to be up the top, for you to like the book itself (not the review). Just had a look and that's gone too.

Yeah, Amazon's been cracking down on a number of things. I miss the tags.

Jay wrote: "Judy wrote: "Under each review there's a little button that says "was this review helpful to you?" That's basically the "Like" button.

Tags are gone from Amazon nowadays."

Good grief - I hadn't e..."

Well I feel better. I'm not as clueless as I thought. :-)

Thinking about the whole issue of reviewing it occurred to me that it is exactly the same situation as one finds oneself in as a composer of music. Once I write a piece it is up to the instrumentalists, and conductor if involved, to decide how to interpret it. Over that I have no say, and I keep my opinions to myself. Sometimes one is surprised by an interpretation that says more than was in one's mind when writing it.
So I agree with Jay - once you have given birth to any creative piece, it is up to those who look, read, listen etc. to decide its worth.

Gill wrote: "Thinking about the whole issue of reviewing it occurred to me that it is exactly the same situation as one finds oneself in as a composer of music. Once I write a piece it is up to the instrumental..."

Excellent analogy, Gill.