Weekly Short Stories Contest and Company! discussion
Get to Know Each Other
>
How do YOU rate books on GR?
date
newest »
newest »
5 Stars. I give books this rating when I feel the book totally wowed me! If I think it was an amazing version of that genre or even better did better than anything that genre has offered before the book's release I give it that book. I also almost every time will give this a rating of five if I think the book itself has done something significant in the writer's market or to the general media beyond this one.Ex.: The Hobbit by J. R. R. Tolkien.
4 Stars. I give this rating to a book that mostly made me impressed but something (if anything noticeable) held it back a little. Usually if I review a book of this kind I might point out what its noticeable flaw (or flaws) was but give it huge praise other than that. The book is still remarkable though in a great way. If I don't point out what I didn't like about it, it simply was a great book but naturally could not rise above getting 4 stars (or getting an 80% out of 100!)
Ex.: The Bachman Books by Richard Bachman (real name: Stephen King)
3 Stars. This is a tough-to-explain one. Most of the time this is either a book I was expecting to be great and it turned out average to me, a book I was not thrilled about but wanted to like, or a book that seemed good but was not impactful to me. In the latter case I find no typos or grammar errors so there is not much reason to find fault with it. (Also it might just be a childhood book that I liked but I may or may not remember it too well).
Ex. The Lottery Winner: Alvirah and Willy Stories by Mary Higgins Clark
2 Stars. There might be spelling and grammar errors throughout. Also I found the book disappointing. There was a reason I did not like the book and- versus the 4 star review- the flaw that I had a problem with was too noticeable for me to find this book enjoyable.
Ex.: 222 More Urban Legends: Absolutely True Stories... by Thomas Craughwell
1 Star. This is a book I find absolutely not worth reading. There was either something I found too unpleasant, maybe offensive but if not any of that I strongly disliked the book to the point I felt I could not recommend it to anyone.
Thr3e by Ted Dekker
Differences in opinion is okay so feel free to put down your very own reasons. Go ahead and talk about it! :)
My rating habits have changed a bit this year. I used to almost never give a 2 star and this year it's one of the ratings I'm using the most. I also have more really highs or really lows.My rating system now is:
5 - This book was fantastic. It made me want to read the next book that very second and it got my heart pounding from excitement throughout. (I also use this for books in a series that I loved but maybe wouldn't have made the 5 star cut if the rest of the series wasn't so good.)
4 - This book was really good but had moments that I didn't like. Still it was exciting and I enjoyed reading it.
3 - It wasn't bad. It had very few moments of excitement and probably annoyed me to a point.
2 - This is the lowest rating I will give. I did not like it. It had either no or very few good moments and I'm amazed I finished it.
1 - I never give out this rating since any book that was one star was one I could not finish.
Awesome, Bookbuyer!
CJ wrote: "Awesome, Bookbuyer!":)
It used to be that I would give five stars to anything I liked and ignore everything I hated. Those days are over. As a hobbyist critic, I need a little more depth when it comes to my reviews. Therefore, I’ve devised this system for myself:Extra Credit (Five Stars): This grade belongs to any medium that made me change the way I think whether it’s because I related to it so deeply, I showed a rare display of emotion, or it gave my creative juices an adrenaline boost Pulp Fiction-style. This is an extremely rare grade and it takes a lot for a medium to earn this accolade.
Example: “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” by Stephen Chbosky for making me believe in love again.
Pass (Four Stars): This is the most common grade I give a medium because I usually expect to like whatever it is I’m consuming. It doesn’t hit me as hard as an extra credit graded work does, but I liked it nonetheless.
Example: “The Cat Who Talked to Ghosts” by Lilian Jackson Braun for being a light and lovable read.
Mixed (Three Stars): Although I still enjoyed whatever work I gave this grade to, there were some nagging flaws that kept it from being 100% enjoyable. These flaws can be anything from bad grammar, a slow pace, or a storyline quirk that didn’t quite pan out.
Example: “Titan Screwed” by James Dixon and Justin Henry for being a well-researched wrestling book that dragged on forever (much like a three-hour episode of WWE Raw).
Fail (Two Stars): Though I thoroughly hated this medium, I was able to finish it all the way through without giving up. The flaws are many and they stick out like a sore thumb. The thought of capitulating has crossed my mind at least one or two times.
Example: “Fifty Shades of Grey” by E.L. James for being poorly written, misogynistic, and lacking in major sex scenes. I know my Good Reads profile says I gave it three stars, but in hindsight, it deserved less.
Did Not Finish (One Star): Unlike something that has earned a failing grade, this medium was so unbearable that I couldn’t finish the damn thing. Maybe I became more impatient as I grew older, but if you can’t hold my attention past the first twenty or thirty pages, you’ve earned this single solitary star.
Example: “Fifty Shades Darker” by E.L. James for suffering from the same problems as its predecessor. I ended up giving “Fifty Shades of Grey” to my now ex-girlfriend Brianna as a Valentine’s Day present while donating the other two books in the series to a thrift store.
With this grading system to guide me, my reviews consist of five paragraphs: an introductory synopsis, three traits I enjoyed or hated about the book, and a conclusive paragraph to bring it all home.
Garrison wrote: "It used to be that I would give five stars to anything I liked and ignore everything I hated. Those days are over. As a hobbyist critic, I need a little more depth when it comes to my reviews. Ther..."Wow, that is thorough Garrison! I like that you count a lot toward what you rate your books.
And it's funny, the way you gave phrases before each star reminds me of how I review some stuff on my blog. The way I do it seems to make less sense, lol!
If you want I could get into how I rate in that way. This goes for non-books like music and other stuff. (and I haven't been able to rate much in this way so it might not be easy to find but still!)
I didn't know you had a blog, CJ! That's awesome! Where's the link? :)
It's kind of all over the place when it comes to topics. I'll send you the link by message if you want.
I guess since earlier I talked about blogs let me tell you how I rate them as in when they are music reviews. I hope to get to that soon. In fact I think I was doing this to my movie reviews (possibly) I don't remember as it's been a while if I used this system at all now that I think about it!Maybe I did this for books. (Besides my triple book reviews. But also as that weakly makes this relative to this topic, lol!)
As an interesting change I use words but they are crucial to the star rating
5 Stars. If there is a saying like "Excellent!" or "Classic!" the exclamation point signals it's the best one I've seen/read, etc.
4 Stars. Just a "Great" or anything without an exclamation point.
3 Stars. "Good" or "Not Bad." More than likely I will say Good everytime.
2 Stars. "Fair."
1 Star. It will be obvious that I will say in one word or two that I didn't like it at all.
Not to be confusing but I also wanted to do things like "Fair but Good" which would mean 2 1/2 stars. I hope people didn't ever leave my blog over this confusion.... lol.
I use the stars and it depends on if I finish the book or how much I enjoyed reading it. (There are some books that really make me mad, so I refuse to finish them, and that's ok, because I can find another book to love.) Books are supposed to be fun and interesting just like games!
Samantha wrote: "I use the stars and it depends on if I finish the book or how much I enjoyed reading it. (There are some books that really make me mad, so I refuse to finish them, and that's ok, because I can find..."Yep. It's good to do it that way. If I find the book impossible to get through and enjoy I give it only a star right away and quit reading. It doesn't receive my time if I have trouble with it like that.
CJ wrote: "Samantha wrote: "I use the stars and it depends on if I finish the book or how much I enjoyed reading it. (There are some books that really make me mad, so I refuse to finish them, and that's ok, b..."Exactly. I'm so glad that other people do the same thing!
Just wondering. But does anyone else have the three-star rating very split on whether they even like the book they read or they feel they probably are humoring it by rating it so (like "This was a book I didn't like much but at the same time there was nothing I had against it.").
Hey there, everyone! I have an announcement to make when it comes to my rating system. The bottom score (one star) will be replaced with another phrase since there were books and movies I’ve reviewed that received higher marks even though I didn’t finish them. From now on, the one star score will be changed from Did Not Finish to “Zero Credit”. In order to earn a Zero Credit score, the book, movie, or TV show can’t just be god awful. It has to be so blatantly offensive that it makes me want to strangle the creator. I’m not talking about little errors in judgment here and there. I’m talking about an all-out assault on human decency. I haven’t read any books that meet this criterion just yet, nor would I want to. I don’t headhunt when I write my reviews. I want to enjoy what I’m reading or watching. Just like the Extra Credit grade, its negative counterpart, the Zero Credit grade, will be extremely rare. That’s all I have to say for now.
I usually don’t rate them. Sometimes I’ll rate a reference work if I’ve found it particularly useful, but a piece of writing reflects the quality of the mind behind it. To complicate matters further, the response to a piece of writing reflects the quality of the reader’s mind.Disentangling a poem or story from a reader’s interpretation of it is a nearly impossible task. A case could be made that a piece of writing is different for every person who reads it, and that the notion of a story or a poem as an objective artifact is, itself, a fiction.
Garrison wrote: "Hey there, everyone! I have an announcement to make when it comes to my rating system. The bottom score (one star) will be replaced with another phrase since there were books and movies I’ve review..."That's interesting Garrison! Let's hope you don't end up finding any or very few "Zero Credit" books to give that grade. To be honest I think two books I am thinking of that I so far have given one star I have yet to finish reading. But I just don't plan on finishing them because they were just that terrible!
M wrote: "I usually don’t rate them. Sometimes I’ll rate a reference work if I’ve found it particularly useful, but a piece of writing reflects the quality of the mind behind it. To complicate matters furthe..."I like your thoughts on that M. I can understand that.
In a way I feel like that too only that there is a book series I have deliberately not rated. Not because I didn't consider one or the other particularly better than the other but I felt that each one had a distinct storyline, had its own tale, and each brought something different and felt "new." So I didn't give each a distinct rating because it felt it wouldn't be fair.
I don't actually think I'm a very good rater...since a lot of my books hover around four or five stars. I can't imagine they're all winners... Three stars makes an appearance when I enjoy the book but there are some challenges about it that make it difficult to just jump in. Two stars are for things I didn't really enjoy but some saving merit. One stars are for complete tripe but maybe I just never get through them to get to that one star rating? Of course I also haven't been as active on GR as in the past. Working on changing that.
I find when I write about books it's often more about the writing brought about by the reading and what's been pushed around in my head. And so the quantitative aspect isn't quite as there.
My apologies to anyone who enjoys tripe and other varieties of offal.
Matthew wrote: "I don't actually think I'm a very good rater...since a lot of my books hover around four or five stars. I can't imagine they're all winners... Three stars makes an appearance when I enjoy the book ..."You are like me in a lot of these points. And I think I feel the same about the review writing aspect as well.
I almost always give a book I loved 5 stars with maybe a short comment. I occasionally give 4 stars. If it’s less than that I usually skip the review. I just adopt the “if you don’t have anything nice to say...” mantra. 3 stars for Willy and Alvirah?!! I reread that book just this summer bc I love those characters so much. I just realized today that Mary Higgins Clark is 91!!
So…if you’re familiar with my book and movie reviews, you’d know that I have a grade name for each of the five stars that I’m afforded. And that got me thinking…what would an autistic burnout version of those ratings look like? Hmm…Five Stars a.k.a. Extra Credit becomes Uh-Huh.
Four Stars a.k.a. Pass becomes Fine.
Three Stars a.k.a. Mixed becomes Okay.
Two Stars a.k.a. Fail becomes No.
One Star a.k.a. Zero Credit becomes This Is Stupid, I’m Never Doing This Again!
Will these low-energy grade names become a thing? Probably not, but it’s something I think about way too often.
----
So I was just wondering... what makes YOU like, dislike, give mixed opinions on, and anything in between when you review/rate a book? If you want to give an extended explanation of what I mean consider putting it down this way:
((See below))