Victorians! discussion

How do you assign rankings to what you read?

Thanks Lily for this question. For me, I am fairly critical. I rarely give four or five stars. But then I rarely give a one star. For me, three is average and is used frequently. I'm fairly picky about writing style, etc.

I think I broadly agree with you, Deb. Three, for me, is a decent read. Basically, I didn't waste my time with this book. Two is for anything definitely underwhelming, and I rarely give one's unless I really hated, loathed reading that book. Four is great, and five is a definite "re-reading will always be worth it".

I should say, though, that I rate books for myself and myself alone: I use the stars as a personal reminder of what I liked/didn't like, rather than as an indication to others. Some books I've given a five to might not be fabulously written, but felt like they marked me personally in some way at the time I read them - I wouldn't necessarily recommend them to friends. Others which I've given a two or one could be considered landmark oeuvres but I just couldn't get on with them (yes, Emily B, I'm talking about you....).

Occasionally I look a my "read" list and think "How could that one have a five and the other a three when I know they're considered out of each other's leagues?". And then I remind myself that I rate for myself and not for the greater good ;-))

I take the ratings literally. I try to stay away from over-rating. If the read was OK, then I give it 2 stars, etc. I do give out 1 star ratings usually for books I abandon. Life is too short to spend hours reading stuff that's completely unappealing.

I will admit that I am a little more generous with classics that stood the test of time. Usually the crafting and command of language of the writing is on a whole other level than your average entertainment novel or beach-read, and to me that deserves special consideration.

Same here - I rate what I read for myself, sometimes for the beauty of the language, such as in the case of classics, or for plot/character/enjoyment factors, or any combination.

3 stars would be for an entertaining read, nothing more, and majority of my books are 3, 3.5, and 4. It is extremely rare that I would give 2 stars (I probably would just stop reading the offending work) and 5 is reserved for books that completely took over my mind and life too.

It appears that we may rate books differently.

Does Goodreads have any page at all where this is discussed more in general?

I see it that way that I have a spectrum of five different ratings and should try to use them all and convey a message to other book readers.

Another factor is that I do not choose a book and do not read it if it does not appeal to my taste in books. So there will naturally be a lot more books rated three, four and five stars and a Higher average than three. Here is my way of rating:

One star - Lousy! Warning: don't read this book! Can not imagine anyone like this book.
Two stars - Maybe OK to some people, but not to me.
Three stars - I understand that some people may enjoy this book, but it was only passable for me. Writing was not bad.
Four stars - A really good book. I recommend it to others.
Five stars - This book made a deep impact on me. It kept me spellbound and marked me for life. I am often reminded of it and it will follow me for the rest of my life.

I really like your rating system, Charlotte. Your comments on a five-star rating really resonated with me. For that reason, I feel that a five- star rating should be given sparingly. I reserve a 5-star for books that are my absolute favorite, ones I would reread, and that stand the test of time (both for me personally and according to the literary definition). Books like Jane Eyre, Pride and Prejudice and more modern classics like Their Eyes Were Watching God all get a five-star rating. But of course those are obvious.

The hard part, for me, is knowing how to rate a book after I've just read it. Am I elevating the rating because I'm caught up in a moment and I feel good? Will I still think this book is amazing a month or a year from now? That's hard to determine right after finishing a book!

Erica wrote: "But of course those are obvious. ..."

Not for all of us! (I have many bones to pick with the popularity of Jane Eyre for young women. Maybe because I read Rhys first. )

There are 4 main categories that I consider when I rate a book. I usually try asking myself these questions to help me give it a rating.

Plot: Is the plot well thought out? Does it take an unexpected turn? Is it logical and convincing?
Characters: Are the characters relatable? Do they have a good development?
Emotional level: Does this book show me a different perspective? Can I relate to the characters or events? Do I feel inspired or moved by the book?
Writing style: Did the author seem passionate? Are the scenery descriptions pretty or poetic?

I agree with a lot of people on here who say they don't want to waste time on reading a 1-star book. Therefore, I don't rate books with 1-star because I usually just throw them away. Self-space is very important!!

2-Stars: It was an OK read. I gained some knowledge from it. The writer was passionate and conveyed the message. The characters were good.
3-Stars: I liked it. The plot was interesting. I could relate to the characters. The writing style was pleasant. Overall good development.
4-Stars: I really liked it: The author writes in a very detailed and smooth style. The plot was engaging. I was inspired by the book. Overall a great development. I feel like I really got to know the Characters.
5-Stars: The book was amazing! I will talk about this book and bring it up in conversation with others. It left an impression on me and impacted me in some way. Everything in the book was a delight to read. It was an unexpected surprise. It was a page turner and a fast read because I like it so much. It was a work of art.

Sometimes I will re-rate a book several months later, but I don't usually re-rate a 5-star.

My 3-star rating is vee similar to yours, JJ. I tend to award that most often and it has the broadest definition for me.

I also re-rate books sometimes, depending on its lasting impact.

There is subjectivity in my rating, though I try to have some objectivity also. I consider how well written the book is. For non-fiction, I consider clarity. For non-fiction, plot, uniqueness, etc... For both I consider the intended audience. It is not fair for me to rate a book low, if I do not fit the intended audience.

I do find it fascinating how we all apply the simple rating system. It always cracks me up when I see on person on GR taking exception to another's star choice. We're all so different!

I wish there were subtler gradations in rating ... to me, most of my reads are 4, and I wish I could do 3.5, 4, and 4.5, rather than 4! (I can't round up 4.5 to 5, 'cause a 5 book is Really Special, and rounding down 3.5 to 3 doesn't seem fair ... so most of my reads are 4.

1 is completely, irredeemable horrible. I am unlikely to have finished any of these, unless required to for class or some other project. Can we give 0? I don't see how.

2 is a mediocre, perhaps amateurish, not-very-good book. I would never recommend this.

3 is okay. Maybe I didn't warm up to the characters, maybe the plot didn't grab me, but it's not obviously a bad book, it's just not for me, say.

4 is good. I liked it a lot. I would seek out more by the same author. (I might seek out more of a 3 star, but only if the writing was good and some other aspect of the plot or characters left me cold)

5 is wonderful, maybe my favourite book that year. I chortle with delight while reading it. I go to bed at night pleased that we found each other. I peek at other people's reviews to see if they loved it as much as I did.

5 plus a shelf of "favorites" = a classic (or deserved modern classic, in my opinion) ... kind of a 5+. The Last Unicorn, The Princess Bride, Gone With the Wind, Tom Jones, Middlemarch, Vanity Fair, Howl's Moving Castle, etc. etc.

Maybe I should adopt my 5 strategy, and add a 3.5 and 4.5 shelf so I can (at least for myself) further differentiate all those 4s!

I agree with Ashley about wishing for a ".5" rating system. I rate books for my own reference more than to inform others.

Most of my books seem to get a 4 rating, meaning that I enjoyed it, will be giving it shelf space (my TBRs live in tall, teetery stacks until they have been read and I decide if they are keepers or not). A 4 rating also means that, if you asked me about it and I knew you well enough to know it was a genre you would like, I would recommend it to you.

A 3 rating isn't necessarily a bad thing- mostly it means that I read the book, didn't hate it, but I won't be keeping it because I don't think I'll be wanting to reread it.

A 5 is a book that I completely got lost in and want to keep forever, and I may own more than one edition of it.

A 2 is a disappointment, and will definitely be sold, traded, or donated.

I have been really lucky this past year- all my reads were 4s and 5s, with a very small handful of 3s. And there's that one 2 that we won't mention any further, but no 1s.