Editors' Association of Earth discussion

Do you leave public reviews on the books that you've read? If so, do you leave good reviews only or well-rounded ones? If you don't leave reviews, why not?

Of course, I never leave public reviews on books I've edited (considered bad form). But personal books that I've read and enjoyed, I always try to review somewhere because good writers deserve a boost. If they've provided me with the luxury of a few hours of pleasure, then I figure I owe them help in getting the word out about their book.

I write reviews regularly for NY Journal of Books, and that keeps me busy enough that I don't review books I read for pleasure. Well, occasionally I do, but it's not the norm. I need the break in between, especially since I edit books the rest of the time. Once or twice I've posted a review of a book I've edited but am careful to say so. I don't think there should be a ban on reviewing books for clients and friends, relatives, etc., as long as the review is sincere and a disclaimer is offered. Other people disagree with that position, though -- some quite strongly.

I wouldn't leave reviews on client books (doesn't seem right to me).
What about critical reviews on books-for-pleasure?

I don't leave critical (i.e., negative) reviews anymore, books-for-pleasure or otherwise. I read too many books, and dislike a large enough share of them, to waste the time it takes to pan them.

Negative reviews are painful to write as as well as to receive, and they serve no purpose. Why should I shoot down someone's work, knowing full well that other people will enjoy it? I am not the Taste Police. My job as a reviewer is to help the book find its audience, not to impress anyone with how much I loved or hated it. I will salt in some opinion where appropriate, but balance it with commentary about the rest of the package and let readers make up their minds.

The only reason I'll post a review of a book-for-pleasure is because I want to recommend it to friends and other readers.

As others have said, I wouldn't review a book I've edited. Definitely not cool in my book.

However, I do write book reviews for Copyediting, both on the blog and in the newsletter. I also will sometimes publish book reviews here.

I will publish a bad review, especially if I think it's a book a lot of editors might be drawn to and I think it's harmful or just not worth their time (a recent example of the latter: "'May I Quote You on That': Of Limited Use").

That doesn't mean being disrespectful or unprofessional. The entire publishing process is hard work, and the writer deserves to be treated as a professional, even when they're not.

A quick addendum: All of my remarks about reviews pertain to fiction save for a handful of my NYJB reviews.

Of course, I wouldn't be disrespectful at all.

An example would be that I recently read a book (indie author) that is interesting however it has not been edited and the plot is somewhat convoluted. It was an 'I enjoyed this but ...' type novel.

I'm the editor-in-chief of BoldFace, the blog for the Toronto branch of Editors Toronto. would anyone object if I posted book reviews here that appear on the blog? Thanks!

I post reviews on books I read for pleasure. Every book gets a star rating, some books get a more in depth review. I've done positive and negative reviews. For the negative reviews, I try to be specific by highlighting the positive and then indicate what would have made it better. Usually I'm not critical of a story or plot (don't yuck someone else's yum!), it's almost always the writing that elicits a negative. I don't know if an author cares about getting this kind of feedback, but if the other elements are good I feel like I want to share a way it could be better. (Mixing past and present tense for no reason is one thing that particularly bugs me.)