Bummer, I liked your dnf shelf.

I agree that rating is a very personal thing. It's one reason why I often don't want to rate books I've read if they didn't spark my fire.

I usually only review something with a bad rating because I feel there is a point I want to make, but again it's only my point of view.

For example, I dislike head hopping in most stories (the longer ones though it works).

I also try to judge a book on what a writer is trying to do rather than whether I liked it or not. Hence where someone might rate a book badly because they didn't like a protagonist, I'll give it a good rating if I feel the writer has succeeded in depicting the type of character they set out to. That takes bravery.

I also might add a star on for originality or for trying something different.

I must admit though it irks me to see one of my books get a low rating without any attempt at explanation. At least give me an idea why they didn't like it.

As it is, the only way I can tell is to "compare books" and see if it's the style of book they usually read, if not, I shrug and feel sorry for the fact they wasted their money on something that wasn't their cup of tea.

Too bad. I've had 4 friends here in GR do similar things, all of them under pressure from both authors or other readers who challenged low ratings. It made them uncomfortable to the point where they took down both ratings and reviews.

As a reader it's kind of frustrating when people just avoid talking about the books they really didn't like. That's as useful to help other people decide whether or not to read a book as a glowing recommendation. Maybe more so.

Wow. Kinda surprised anyone even saw this! But it's an interesting conundrum, because I don't disagree with y'alls sentiments.

You know if I was only a reader, I think I'd've kept that shelf. And I'd have probably made an effort to have a (short) explanation on each of why. Hopefully halfway constructive so the author would at least have something to work with if s/he so chose. Would be especially helpful when the reasons for DNF are more personal than about quality, so that a reader understood that it wasn't necessarily about quality.

But I fancy myself an author, and perhaps in even more of a fantasy, fancy myself a decent one. In that case, and especially if I do pursue possible publication, it gets into this territory that I really don't want to be in: judging peers.

Whether or not I meant it as a judgement, I would ultimately end up hurting feelings in a way that made a person want to get even, and once that kind of stuff starts... ugh. Just don't want to go there.

It's like -- you know, I have an advanced degree in science, and one of the most important things I learned getting that degree (I'm serious, here), is that I'm a cooperator, not a competitor (and if you are familiar with academia, you can guess that was a painful piece of learning). And I will go to great lengths to find another track if I think there's a competition. So -- not sure if the relevance is clear -- if as an author, I start listing which other author's work I don't like, that sets up a competitive atmosphere in spades.

But yeah, I'm one of those people who go straight to the one-stars to see if there are reasons listed. Not because I want dirt, but because those are the reviews that are most likely to tell me if I'm going to have issues with the story or not. All five star reviews are essentially the same. One star reviews are different and specific.

I've been careful about giving out low stars for the same reasons I got rid of the DNF. If I were only ever going to be a reader, I think I'd be quicker to point out the reasons I didn't finish/didn't like.

After all, if Jack London can get loads of 1-stars, I don't see why m/m authors can't handle a few. :D

Hi Ocotillo. Blame Alison for poking my nose over here. Her comment popped up on my update feed, and because I've enjoyed your reviews I had to throw in my two cents.

As an author I'll agree that your choices are completely different than as a reader and I can understand why you've made the choice you have. Makes lots of sense to me, especially in a small niche genre where everyone essentially knows everyone else.

Good luck with your writing!

Hi Val, yeah, I'm trying to review when I can. Not like your reviews, for other consumption, more like just a Gee whiz I liked this sort of thing!

I enjoyed Wicked Cool!! Haven't yet ordered your third. :)

I wish there were a way to point out books I particularly enjoyed without slighting other authors.

I think your decision to blow away the stars is a good one. It is such a subjective choice anyway. And I've seen books get one star with no review or explanation. Often by 'hidden' profiles. The whole thing seems too random.

I thought I could just avoid reviewing books by authors who write in the same genre as I, but that became difficult and THEN I thought I'd only review books written by authors who have passed away.

Which meant I couldn't review or recommend David L. Martin or Holly Black, both of whom rock my world.

I still haven't figured it out. I'm left thinking any rating or review at all is a mistake.

AM and Teddypig, please don't stop reviewing or recommending though. Some of the best books I've read, I wouldn't have even known about if it hadn't been for some indication from another reader that they liked them.

I like the 'Keeper Shelf' idea. I, too, will buy a book in trade paperback or even hard cover if I really enjoy it.

If the power goes out I will be too insane to read, though.

Teddypig wrote: "Special is not perfect just more interesting."

Yes! Exactly. :D

Sorry I've been out. Dayjob gets overwhelming sometimes (summers off are nice, though!) and I simply don't have time to keep up with my alternate top-secret life. Heh.

A.M. wrote: "I wish there were a way to point out books I particularly enjoyed without slighting other authors."

Huh. Yeah, like yours. :)

I'm finding that short reviews of what I liked, helps accomplish that need in myself. It allows me to be personal. In the sense that it frees me to explain what about the book fed my own desires for reading, rather than some grand pronouncement about whether others should find the book worth reading.

It frees me from stars, it's positive, and I suspect that it is useful for other potential readers, too, because then maybe they can think 'ah, yes, that's important to me, too' or conversely 'ugh. Who cares about xxx?'

Thing is, I've only recently started doing this, so I feel like I have this whole backlog of great stories that I'm silent on.

Here, A.M., want an example? In case you are one of those authors who avoids your own reviews, you can link to my review of Death by Misfortune here. I really loved it, btw. :) http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...

Teddypig wrote: "Well my thing is that I might give a C to a book but still keep the dang thing forever because even flawed it is still special... I might even agree with you rating scale wise how bad a book is but I still cherish it for something special it is to me..."

Yes, that's it, exactly. Whereas I do expect a certain degree of proficiency, the rest is intensely personal. Sometimes that personal love might even keep me from seeing flaws, but why would I want to go seek them out?

Admit One was an example of that for me. The book is good, but she wrote about a part of the country that I know (TX) in such a way that clearly showed such a love and respect for such a good and deeply flawed people that I just hold it close to my heart. I doubt it will hit many people in just that way.

I am one of those authors. Even the good reviews make me self concious and I try to avoid that when I'm writing. But I read yours, and it made me blush. Thank you very much. I'm glad you enjoyed the book and when the next in the series comes out I'll be sure to make it clear that it's a Bill and Christopher story.

Your writing feeds me in a way that not many authors do. It's in a combination of the character development and world building. So yay, keep writing, pls.