More than Just a Rating discussion

I finished reading Yukio Mishima's "Confessions of a Mask" and I have been confused on how to rate the book (the irony seeing that *SPOILER* (view spoiler)[the book deals largely with confusion (hide spoiler)]).

I was enamored by several sections of the book that would total to about twenty pages and would receive a five star rating. However, the other two-hundred and forty pages would average three and four stars. How should I go about rating this book?

My rating of the sections in “Confessions on a Mask” are based on my style of rating books where the book is dividing into sections following the Goodreads rating scale, and then averaged together to provide a cumulative rating. The section ratings, which are based on the Goodreads scale, are interpreted on my personal enjoyment, so a five star rated section had me hooked while a one star rated section had me bored. Following this method, I “liked” reading the first half of “Confessions of a Mask” (three stars), I “really liked” reading the second half of it (four stars), and I found about twenty pages of it to be “awesome” (five stars). The cumulative rating of the book is roughly four stars. The adoption of this rating style has lowered my account’s average rating from 3.42 stars to 2.65 stars, a near one star rating drop for all of my one-hundred and eighty-two books rated.

Is this rating style too harsh? I am finding that it is near impossible to find a book with a rating of five stars through its entirety. This is even harder with books of longer length. Even worse, I am finding that books that I have currently rated at five stars contain less than a third of the book with five star content, which would lead to their ratings being lowered to four stars or three stars.

Some downsides I have found to this approach is my theory that five star rated sections require lower rated sections as a buildup. Without them, the “punch line” of the five star rated section would not occur. I have found this to be true for books of shorter length, where I can see this buildup and have left a five star rating for these books. Books of longer length are not as easy to understand with this theory, since the plots are not as linear, and I have resorted to using my harsh rating style.

Another downside to this style are sections that are rated one star because of how tedious they are to read, but are enjoyable in reflection and reminiscence. This rating style penalizes laborious readings despite there being value.

I would like to receive feedback on my style and even be provided with your own style of rating. I am in extreme turmoil over this and would greatly appreciate any responses.

In tough cases like this, I sometimes just skip the star ratings, and rely on my review to speak for itself.

In this particular case, though, I think you might be a little too harsh. If you think about a book after you close it, if it gives you ideas to ponder, and brings joy to your spirit, and satisfaction to your cognition, then it was definitely a valuable read for you. And therefore you should rate it more highly... never mind the 'tediousness' of some parts.

Also, have you defined what you want your star ratings to do? Are they signals to the people who are considering whether to read the book? Or are they directly for you, so you can have a record? Maybe you're just interested in statistics (what percentage of books you read earn five stars...) or maybe you want to signal to yourself (that this book might be worth a reread...).

All those functions could be met by careful reviews and by creative shelving... you do not need to rate any books, really.

Still, to answer your most direct question with a direct answer: no, I do not think you are too harsh. Many of think that very few books should get a five star rating.

I think maybe you shouldn't use Goodreads' metric of "I liked it" "it was amazing" etc. I think you should develop your own. For example, I try to reserve five star ratings for books that I found almost perfectly enjoyable, thoughtful, etc... *and* are also books that I would recommend widely, that have a more universal appeal.

Rate a book by something else. For example, how glad are you that you read it? One star - complete waste of time, five stars, plan to reread several more times. Or, for example, how much would I be willing to pay for this book? Or, for example, how likely am I to reread it? Or recommend it? Or *remember* it and think about it, maybe talk about ideas from it....

Killer of Dreams wrote: "I finished reading Yukio Mishima's "Confessions of a Mask" and I have been confused on how to rate the book (the irony seeing that *SPOILER* [spoilers removed]).

I was enamored by several sections..."

I do not think that you are being "too harsh" but few books will remain consistent throughout and if there are, that then begs the question.... Why? No life, no situation or occurrance is ever constantly five stars therefore few books should be. Plus to my mind five stars is only for out and out excellance. A well written book that is dull, can recieve a similar rating to a thrilling read that lacks, style or real content. Plus there is always the aftermath of the book. I once read "Blindsight" by Peter Watts, A book I enjoyed but realised that even when reading it, that most others would find it incomprehensible (I think he set out to make it as difficult to read as possible), I gave it an intermediate rating.

Never have I thought about a book after completeing it as often as I have thought of this one. The more I think about this book, the more I believe Mr Watts to be correct in his "Understand nothing, believe nothing and even then doubt your disbelief in the senario he suggests. So I think that perhaps I rate books a little early but I dod not think that your method of rating is any more extreme than your average reviewer. Though do do get some, liked it, five stars, didnt like it, one star with no thought to the worth of the book it's self.

Cheryl wrote: "In tough cases like this, I sometimes just skip the star ratings, and rely on my review to speak for itself.

In this particular case, though, I think you might be a little too harsh. If you think ..."

Thank you for responding, Cheryl. All the ratings that I prescribe to books are directly for me, so that I can have a record. I am interested in statistics. I likewise am finding that it is best not to rate and that the Goodreads’ metric system has flaws.

Cheryl wrote: "In tough cases like this, I sometimes just skip the star ratings, and rely on my review to speak for itself.
In this particular case, though, I think you might be a little too harsh. If you think ..."

Going off from what you wrote, that I should rate a book by something else, I especially like your idea of how glad I was to read it. I am working write now on detailing a rating system on this, coupled with the Goodreads metric system, that will shift from my current strict rating system and provide defectiveness in rating and a larger array of ratings from one star to five stars.

I finished changing all my ratings to my strict rating system and I have 0 five star books, 18 four star books, 60 three star books, 75 two star books, and 31 one star books…

Raymond wrote: "I do not think that you are being "too harsh" but few books will remain consistent throughout and if there are, that then begs the question.... Why? No life, no situation or occurrance is ever constantly five stars therefore few books should be. Plus to my mind five stars is only for out and out excellance. A well written book that is dull, can recieve a similar rating to a thrilling read that lacks, style or real content. Plus there is always the aftermath of the book. "

That synthesizes my thoughts perfectly. It seems that a five star rating with these requirements is impossible.

Killer of Dreams wrote: "...I finished changing all my ratings to my strict rating system and I have 0 five star books, 18 four star books, 60 three star books, 75 two star books, and 31 one star books….."
I hope you figure out a way to stop wasting your time on bad books and find more excellent ones!

Cheryl wrote: "Killer of Dreams wrote: "...I finished changing all my ratings to my strict rating system and I have 0 five star books, 18 four star books, 60 three star books, 75 two star books, and 31 one star b..."

Killer of Dreams wrote: "Raymond wrote: "I do not think that you are being "too harsh" but few books will remain consistent throughout and if there are, that then begs the question.... Why? No life, no situation or occurra..."
I do not mind a "Bad" book, There is something to learn from every book, even the really dodgy ones (lol, even if the thing learned is "that is not the way to write") plus we all have our own tastes, what may be appealing to me, would not be to many others, the same applies to you I am sure. What always facinates me is the "Cusp" where writing (quality and content) and the enjoyability of the tale become intermeshed. Few books achieve that in my humble opinion. Often, to write well, the author loses the tale. Leaving you with only phrases and words, beautiful as they may be, but the story itself has vanished. To others the "Tale" is all and the quality of writing, of content, deteriorates in favour of the pace and direction of the story. Few books (again, in my humble opinion) are able to live on the "Cusp" where great writing and an excellent tale combine as one.
I am not suggesting that such books are unicorn's, as they do exist but rather that they are an endangered species as few are seen anymore.
This is not really a worry for me, I enjoy losing myself in a book, good, bad or indifferent (though I prefer it when they are good. Obviously)and will hopefully continue to do so.

You make good points. Still, all things considered, I'd be happier/ more satisfied if I could rate more of the books I read higher, and I imagine most people would.

Well, you can, I also can, but then what do we do when a book is truly magnificent? I think that I have only ever given two five star reviews out of (perhaps) hundreds. I suspect that anything of three stars or over is well worth a read. Yet I have in my head the simple thought; "what if I read a far better book than those I have rated "five" stars? How then do I rate it?
Lol- and I do hope to find that book one day.

Another good point.