Indie Book Club discussion

So, recently I was looking through some of the new releases, and I came across a book that had a rather large sample available to be read. The cover looked good, the summary was nice, but once I started reading it quickly fell apart. While the writing was good, there were a number of problems quickly evident. The book shifted tenses in writing, there were italics where they made no sense, and there were definitions of words written right in the paragraph. While these were things I might have commented on had the book been more established, as it stood it only had one review and one rating, and I felt awkward leaving something negative for a book just getting on it's feet.

So what are your thoughts? When you read a book do you ever shy away from a review? Do you resist rating until it has other feedback, or can you be honest regardless of the circumstances?

Given that the issues you note are formatting, editing and poor English mistakes, I would certainly leave a review of the book even though its new. These are fixable things, but if no one tells the author about them then they'll never have reason to revise their work and it will remain shoddy.

Did you read the whole book or just the sample?

Scott wrote: "Did you read the whole book or just the sample?"

This was my question too. 'Cause you know it's Sod's Law that if you review based on just the sample, exactly 15 words after the sample ends the book will morph into prize winning quality. :-)

I got the impression from your post that you just read the sample. I might leave a non-stared review here on GR, much as I do for DNF books but I wouldn't review it somewhere like Amazon where a star rating is required. I see reviews as opinion pieces on whole works, not part of work.

I would say the sample is fair game, as it is the first view of the author's work but I would state in the review it was based on the sample. Maybe something like the summary and the story (such as it was in the sample) was good there were a number of technical issues. It really is up to you though. Perhaps you could say something like you would be interested to read the book when the technical issues were fixed.

I agree with others, that I would leave the review and state it was a sample. It's not too hard to be constructive about it, but the sooner the author knows the better. Her or his reputation builds one way or another with each sale.

I think one of my replies here vanished... If something pops up twice, my apologies.

It was a sample I was reading, although it was twenty-one chapters so it was fairly lengthy. I do like the input of having a review without the rating, that way you can give feedback without hurting them too much in early stages. Most of the books I've read or reviewed had enough other feedback it felt like you were in a decent 'cushion' of positive and negative, if that makes sense.

I appreciate all the input though! It's good to see how others deal with situations like this.

Mati wrote: " Most of the books I've read or reviewed had enough other feedback it felt like you were in a decent 'cushion' of positive and negative, if that makes sense. "

This makes perfect sense to me. It's a large part of why I try never to be one of the first people to review a book. I promised myself I would never pull any punches. I try to be constructive and not caustic, but if I don't like something I'm gonna say so. But I don't what to be the wicked witch that destroys some new author's rating and leaves their book hanging out with just a two star rating (or some such) so that people then ignore the book. Even if I want to read a book, I'll set it aside until it has enough other reviews to provide a counter balance to any bad review I might leave. Of course, I'm hoping to love every book but it isn't realistic to think I will.

On the other hand, if no one is prepared to be that first reviewer, then the book will never have any reviews! Assuming of course that the typos and errors are bad enough that no one could reasonably leave a 4/5 star.

L.L. wrote: "On the other hand, if no one is prepared to be that first reviewer, then the book will never have any reviews! Assuming of course that the typos and errors are bad enough that no one could reasonab..."

Yes, that's obvious L.L. But as a rule I try not to let it be me. I'm hyper aware that there are authors behind books and new ones, especially SP and indies will almost certainly be reading their reviews. So I don't want to be the one to post that first bad review. (That's pending it would be. There's always the good chance I might love a book, which makes this whole thing mute. But one just can't know going in.) There are others out there who don't mind, might even like being first. I'll let them have the honor.

A.L. wrote: "I would say the sample is fair game, as it is the first view of the author's work but I would state in the review it was based on the sample. Maybe something like the summary and the story (such as..."

I agree, especially with an ebook that can easily be revised and re-posted. The earlier the better for the author in the long run.

I agree that it's tough leaving a negative review, I was taught "if you don't have anything nice to say...." As an author I am even more sensitive to that. However, true criticism is important, especially if you saw so many glaring errors that could be fixed early. I've seen a couple of those, and I tried to see if there was a way to reach the author to send a critique in a message/email. If they're readily available i think that's a reasonable option. if the only way you can easily find to reach the author is through a review, then I think an unrated critique is fair.

I think everything's fair game. It's on Amazon (or some other website). It didn't get there by accident. And your review is for other consumers rather than for the author or publisher. If something's bad, you're warning other people not to spend money on it, or, in your case, not to spend time on it.

That said, things leave a bad taste in my mouth when they become mocking or mean (e.g. year end "worst of" lists, by definition, or reviews that are just strings of insults.) Your criticisms are neither of those, so I wouldn't have a problem posting or receiving them. For me, the question seems to be: is this work salvageable? If I think a work is beyond redemption, I don't leave a comment or review—despite thinking I'm entitled to do so—because I don't see the point. It can't be improved and if it's that bad, other buyers can themselves "beware". If I think a work has potential or if I think someone else could enjoy it, I'll leave some criticisms. The nice thing about this approach is that salvageable works have to have some value, so I try to point that out, too.

Norman wrote: "And your review is for other consumers rather than for the author or publisher. If something's bad, you're warning other people not to spend money on it, or, in your case, not to spend time on it."

I think that is a really good point, and perhaps one to keep in mind more. Most of the books I've read have been 'needs improvement', so it feels more directed towards the author. But that's also a warning to the reader to go in with the mindset it's not perfect yet.

I think some things are better left un-reviewed.

Building on Norman's good points... As an author, I guarantee you that the author of the book in question knows what his sample chapter looks like; he's gone over it at least three times. If it's in such rough shape, then this is probably more of a project than anything else, and it'll just hurt the poor guy's feelings to get a critical review.

However, if the book in question is more than $1.99, or was published by a legit indie pub, then maybe you do leave a "buy at your own risk" type of review (as it's really frustrating to download a book that descends into a pit of grammatical and syntax despair once the paid portion arrives). But it's best to leave that achtung-baby! review only if you purchased and read the book.

Side-comment: there was a famous review we were taught in journalism school where a big city New York reviewer sat in at a small coffee shop acting troupe performance, took out his notepad ... and eviscerated the show and each unpaid actor in the daily paper. Really nasty stuff. He was treating amateurs like they were idiotic pros. Outcry was pretty indignant, by readers and the troupe alike.

Think: is this a real book? Not all self-pubs/indies are alike. Hugh Howley obviously did his due diligence and takes his craft seriously. Others, less so. I think there's a certain level of writing that needs to be achieved before someone can be reviewed as an author rather than a person who's checking off the "write a book" thing on their bucket list by publishing a first draft.

Eliot, I have to respectfully disagree. There are ways to publish without putting a product up for sale (blogs, Wattpad, etc.) Once a book has been put for sale, I think it's fair game to honest reviews. I've given that first scathing review in the "needs a lot of improvement" category. So much so, that while I wasn't mean, I was pretty honest and the writer ended up taking it off sale to go work more on it.

Unfortunately many writers DON'T see the flaws, sometimes even including egregious grammar errors. If it's in rough shape, it shouldn't be for sale, period. Post it to a writer's critique site, or your blog, or Wattpad. But not Amazon, please.

I agree Judy, anything for sale is fair game for reviews. It shouldn't be up there if the author doesn't think that it's finished. So if it's still full of errors it's a good chance that neither they nor their editor has spotted them.

Mati wrote: "So, recently I was looking through some of the new releases, and I came across a book that had a rather large sample available to be read. The cover looked good, the summary was nice, but once I st..."

I write a review once I'm finished, whether it has other reviews or not. Even if it's negative.

At this point in my life, if a sample looks bad or poorly written, I just move on. It's too much drama when you get involved with people like that. I'm not talking about A typo, I'm talking about drafts.

On Goodreads it's easy to message them if you want to avoid future conflict, but on amazon I don't know how you would do that. Either way, there's nothing wrong with kindly pointing out some issues. I personally don't do it any more because I just don't want to get dragged into an argument or be retaliated against, but if I weren't an author probably wouldn't worry about it. My advice to writers at least is to just stay away from those situations and worry about your own writing.

If reviews are for (future) readers, then a reader is perfectly within his rights to post a review that comments on a book full of errors. I've bought books with great reviews, only to wonder why nobody else noticed the horrific writing and lack of editing. The time for author critique is prior to publishing.

I don't have any problem with a review that's based on a sample, either, as long as the reviewer states that. Most books are not going to improve greatly after that point if the sample is lacking. Think about it: the sample is supposed to convince readers that they WANT to read the rest. If it's not the best it can be, the rest of the book won't be, either. I'm not talking about storyline interest; I'm only referring to bad writing/editing.

It doesn't have to be mean, but it should be honest. If they want someone to pay good money for a book, it should be worth it.

You're right, Lynda, and there are plenty of civil ways to say, 'This book may have a nice storyline, but the typos were too distracting and I couldn't finish it.'. Still, as a writer I've decided to just move on for the sake of 'safety' (you know what I mean). If I don't think I could honestly give something at least 3.5 stars, I just move on. But if I was an editor, I would leave reviews on all of them. It would probably be good for business :).

Retaliation is definitely something I've always felt concerned about as a reviewer, which is somewhat unfortunate. I always feel disappointed when there is a mindset that authors can't be readers too.

I review books I enjoy, and I always mention my pet peeves or things I didn't like along with my raves, so they're honest, but also positive. Retaliation is a sad reality, and one I just don't feel like dealing with. My life is too complicated already. I read this lately and found it very encouraging: http://outthinkgroup.com/tips/7-ways-... . It's kind of off the original topic because it's about dealing with criticism from the 'taking it' perspective rather than 'giving it', but to me there's a connection.

I don't envy authors the vulnerability when they're only trying to be honest in a review. I do understand.

I try not to do the "I'm an editor, and..." thing in a review, though, because then someone might think I'm trying to trick them into hiring me. (Though how I could trick anyone into paying me is a mystery I wish I could solve.)

It's like what Mati said in post 25: there is a mindset that authors can't be readers too. People forget that love of reading is often what leads people to write. Authors should be able to read and review without someone crying sour grapes.

Lynda wrote: "I don't envy authors the vulnerability when they're only trying to be honest in a review. I do understand.

I try not to do the "I'm an editor, and..." thing in a review, though, because then someo..."

They should, but unfortunately some authors DO write (possibly) unjustified, unflattering reviews of their 'competition' and so it ruins it for the rest of us. And I really wonder if some writers do look for the worst in other, better, books because they feel threatened or jealous of another person's talent or success. They insist that the reviews a person has are fake or paid for because THEY don't have that many, so other people can't possibly have them either. Of course, some of them really are fake or paid for:). As mentioned before, it makes me wonder when a book with tons of typos or no flow has a dozen 4 and 5 star reviews. That's when leaving a 'real' review can be a real help to potential readers.

Although I agree in part, reviews and their reasons are as varied as the books themselves. Reviewer A might not notice/overlook typos and reviewer B might stop reading over the same level of typos. What one person like another won't so it really is a case of trying to work out which reviews share a particular reader's views.

Oh and for the record it is always bad for an author to comment on reviews, especially negative ones. If the review itself is abusive then report it. If it is just the reader didn't like the book, either don't read reviews or just take note and move on.


Reviews are given for all sorts of reasons by all sorts of people with different views and different prejudices and likes.

And not everyone reads epilogues, although I can't understand why not. I agree, people miss things, forget things or maybe just don't see something in the same way:)