Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
XI. Misc
>
How do you review books?
date
newest »
newest »
I rate them all the same way. I really don't know what an Indie writer is as the lines seem pretty blurry to me. I suppose I should be harsher on spelling and grammar, but I rate the book primarily in terms of Was the book engaging or not? Was the book -- even sci-fi -- believable in terms of how the characters interacted or were portrayed?If I read a book from the author which is supposed to be professionally edited, I will say something in the review about mistakes. If it is prior to publication, I will let the author know that there are errors and that it needs further proof reading. For self-published authors who can fix their errors, I let them know in a private message.
Primarily, I review for content, realistic characters (which is why I don't enjoy magic or fantasy), concepts covered (even ones that make me uncomfortable) and how they are communicated.
I review both the same. I look at the overall story and how it engages me (or not). Then I consider the characters. Are they realistically portrayed and do they develop through the plot. Do I like them, or not.I consider the writing, whether it's well-written. Here I will mention poor grammar, syntax, word usage and typos. If there are only a few, then I will overlook them, but if there are many, I mention it. We can all let a few errors slip through.
I am not great at grammar myself so I dont mind if their are errors here and their.
I rate a book on the basic principal of 'Did I enjoy it?'
Usually in a review I will give a breakdown but not an indepth one, as people ultimately need to make up their own minds. More often I will try and express the feel of a book.
I rate a book on the basic principal of 'Did I enjoy it?'
Usually in a review I will give a breakdown but not an indepth one, as people ultimately need to make up their own minds. More often I will try and express the feel of a book.
Douglas wrote: "I am not great at grammar myself so I dont mind if their are errors here and their.I rate a book on the basic principal of 'Did I enjoy it?'
Usually in a review I will give a breakdown but not a..."
When I was at school, in the time of the dinosaurs, we were told that reading would improve our vocabulary, spelling and grammar. At that time, books rarely had errors, and the rare ones were only typos, not errors made by the author and, more shockingly, missed by editors. (Yes, I've seen that, and in traditionally published authors, too.)
I still think that we should be trying to not only tell a good story, but to tell that story in good English, and with vocabulary that might improve that of our readers.
Not that I think we should pepper our work with long words--that sounds as bad as poor grammar--but if the best word is one not commonly used, then we should use it. As someone said earlier in this thread, you can easily find the meaning if you are using ebooks, and if there are only a few, as I would hope, there's no problem with using a dictionary.
V.M. wrote: "Douglas wrote: "I am not great at grammar myself so I dont mind if their are errors here and their.
I rate a book on the basic principal of 'Did I enjoy it?'
Usually in a review I will give a bre..."
I suspected we attended school at the same time. Walking home from school I had to run to avoid the T-rex`s. Not all of my friends were so lucky!
Anyway, I normally use Grammarly to pick up my errors (on my other laptop) so usually my stuff is okay. But I do like a book with errors, I have a few Zelazny, Moorcock, Joseph Hansen and Ted Lewis H/b`s to name but a few, with errors and I prefer them to the perfect copies.
I prefer the error versions because it shows these great authors are as imperfect as I am.
Anyway, each to his or her own.
I rate a book on the basic principal of 'Did I enjoy it?'
Usually in a review I will give a bre..."
I suspected we attended school at the same time. Walking home from school I had to run to avoid the T-rex`s. Not all of my friends were so lucky!
Anyway, I normally use Grammarly to pick up my errors (on my other laptop) so usually my stuff is okay. But I do like a book with errors, I have a few Zelazny, Moorcock, Joseph Hansen and Ted Lewis H/b`s to name but a few, with errors and I prefer them to the perfect copies.
I prefer the error versions because it shows these great authors are as imperfect as I am.
Anyway, each to his or her own.
E.S. wrote: "I'm involved in a discussion on social media, so I'm curious: how do you rate & review books?Mores specifically: do you amend your review policy when reviewing books by Indie Authors v Traditiona..."
I rate them the same. I would be curious as to the reasoning to rate them differently. I review for strong characters, interesting dialogue, but above all, a good plot that pulls me in from the very beginning. The plot must also be believable.
Overall, I rate traditional and self published books the same. The one area where a self published book may gain or lose a star is grammatical errors. I don't mean a few commas out of place or subjective grammar; I mean major errors like half started sentences, misused idioms (I could(n't) care less, for example), things that could have been easily corrected had the author simply read his/her/their own work before hitting the publish button. So, even if I didn't care for a self published book, if it had few grammatical errors, I'll mention it in my review and probably bump it up a star, because I feel it's worth mentioning.
To-date, I have posted 145 ratings and reviews of books I have read on Goodreads. Some have been posted on other literary websites as well, along with reviews that have not appeared on the Goodreads site. Whether a book is traditionally published, self- published, or published by a vanity press has no influence at all on my review.All of the ratings, without exception, are accompanied by a review. I only read other readers' reviews if they happen to pertain to a book I have already read.
It often proves interesting and informative when someone views the same book from a different perspective, especially if their opinion differs from mine. Occasionally, I discover something within another's review that I may have missed or misinterpreted, so I will re-read the book.
A book is a book. My main purpose of picking a book to read is because it caught my eye and I hope to enjoy it while I dedicate a few minutes of my time to it. As long as it is published and within my budget to buy or read, it has never occurred to me to review a book based on its publishing process. For I have to connect with the characters, experience a superb writing style, feel the engaging voice and note the writing techniques involved. And base my review off these points.
I review whatever I read and that is mostly fiction. I don’t take notes as is write. That would take me out of the story and from being involved. I like to connect with characters and be involved with them. So I write my review at the end on how I have responded to the story and the characters, The more involved I am in a story the better chance of the book getting a higher rating from me.
Great question to ask and interesting to read the various responses! I never distinguish between indie and trad when I write or post reviews.. "Publication" implies a level of completion, so I'm particularly critical of badly written books (the story is poorly executed, the mechanics are lousy, the formatting is difficult to get past... etc.). Even an excellent story will lose a star (or two) if the mechanics aren't attended to. An occasional error is to be expected, but a book that clearly hasn't been properly edited shouldn't be excused for any reason, and as a reviewer it's irresponsible not to mention that to prospective readers. Perhaps my having been an editor makes me especially merciless in this way!
I do not differentiate based on who published the book or how many books the author has to her credit. I look for what's right in a book as well as the author's intention and her ability to create a sound, solid story. Often I also say what tripped me up. I usually start by identifying the questions the books explores, give a brief plot summary, talk about characters and theme and perhaps writing style.
You can find samples of my reviews on the Hooked on Books page at www.writeradvice.com.
Talent
I really don't think how it was published has anything to do with the quality of the book I'm reading, and I don't pay attention to that when I review. I review and rate it based only on its own merits, and nothing else. That said, if a book is a debut novel, and it is really good, I do give it a little extra credit.
I started out reviewing books to give my students a place to start when trying to choose books. These were reluctant readers. I read and review regardless of how it was published. I purchase both traditional and self-published books for my school book shelves. I am looking for quality, not how it was published to recommend to people. There was a time when being self-published was considered a no-no. Many traditionally published authors have self-published books today and many self-published authors have traditionally published. The review should be based on the content itself.
Hi Sandra,What grade are your students? If they are junior high or above they might be interested in vaccines, their history, and their safety.
Non-Fiction
DON'T LET THE DR. WAKEFIELD’S OF THE WORLD CONVINCE YOU TO ENDANGER YOUR CHILD’S LIFE will be published 7/1/21 on Amazon but I would be happy to send you a draft if you are interested.
How much is the life of your child or grandchild worth?
This story starts with a milkmaid named Sarah Nelms in 1796. It resulted in the complete elimination of a plague that killed millions of people all over the world. Dr. Jenner developed the first "vaccine" that would go on to save millions of lives around the world. We now have multiple vaccines that prevent over 10,000 deaths every year in the US. We have vaccines that can prevent cancer. Yet, we have parents that have been convinced by quacks that it is safer not to vaccinate their children. They make their children drink the "Jim Jones Kool Aid". This has deadly consequences. This book is being written to help parents and grandparents understand the importance of continuing to use these safe vaccines to save their own lives and their children's lives. It will cover a brief history of vaccine development and the dramatic reduction of diseases and deaths after the use of vaccines. Parents that stopped their children's vaccines, then must live with the guilt if their children die from vaccine preventable diseases and unnecessary deaths.
I agree with Douglas. If I am reading/reviewing fiction the main question--Is it enjoyable, does it keep me on the edge of my seat, do I even want to finish the book, do I look forward to another book by the same author. John D MacDonald and Travis McGee, Lee Child and Reacher are addictive for summer reading. Some authors only have one great book Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes.
The Carpetbaggers by Harold Robbins and Playboy was the only way to learn about sex when I was in high school. Sex was always taught in school during the 60's but not in class, only the playground and locker room. They wondered why 1/3 of our graduating class was pregnant.
If I am reviewing a medical paper or book, I want to know does it add anything to my medical knowledge. Was it based on sound research? Will it help me cure diseases? Will it advance science? Does it "add one more rung to the ladder"?
Dr David Grimes
How it's published has nothing to do with the story. Either it is engaging or it isn't. 3 stars if it's a good book.
4 stars if it is a great book.
5 stars when the story has me so engrossed, I forget to take breaks while reading.
Mores specifically: do you amend your review policy when reviewing books by Indie Authors v Traditionally Published Authors? Are you kinder? Harsher? Or do you rate them the same?
If you do change your review policy, why?
I personally think that you should rate indie books and traditionally published books the same way, but I know people have different opinions...so I'm curious!