Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

Your comments, please.

In what context?

In your perspective, can perfect writing be done without series of reading? How do you classify reading and writing, do you just see them as brother and sister, with little or no assistance from each other, or do you see them as twins that have one origin but can still be independent of each other, or do you see them as Siamese twins that are dependent on each other for survival. please, your comment.

A writer or author can’t be a writer without being a self reader. You have to not only read what you have written, but you have to know what you have written. I am a writer, not an author. I write for fun. It’s nothing for me to write a story for myself; a story that only my eyes are going to see. If I write a story to share with others, it’s still a story that I have written for myself. I read my own writings. I’m my own worst critic. Sometimes, I don’t see what other sees. Sometimes, it even surprises me what I have written. I write in my head, before type out my stories.

Authors needs to read their book reviews to see how people see their stories, because this is a learning lesson. Some readers don’t write reviews, they only rate books.

Reading plays a big important role in writing.

Arch, I agree with most everything you said until you said 'Authirs need to read their book reviews to see how people see their stories...'. I'm no author, but I've seen authors talk about how their publishers tell them not to look at their reviews to keep them separated from each other. Every person is entitled to their opion and has their own version of a good story, so it does no good for an author to read negative reviews - they'll be there regardless of what the author does and will only make them feel bad.

Ember wrote: "Arch, I agree with most everything you said until you said 'Authirs need to read their book reviews to see how people see their stories...'. I'm no author, but I've seen authors talk about how their publishers tell them not to look at their reviews to keep them separated from each other. Every person is entitled to their opion and has their own version of a good story, so it does no good for an author to read negative reviews - they'll be there regardless of what the author does and will only make them feel bad. "

So, you think that an author should only read good things about their book? That doesn’t help an author. I don’t believe that publishers should be telling authors not to read their reviews, good and negative. Authors needs readers to buy their books. Publishers and authors needs to know that a lot of readers go by reviews to determine if they are going to buy a book. If a reader is strict about grammar and sees reviews about how a book is filled with grammar errors, they will not buy that book. I have read reviews and also been in group discussions where readers speak their mind about grammar errors in books. Your money is always going to mean more to you than an author’s book. Grammar is only an example as to why authors needs to read reviews. Side note: I have to say that you can find grammar errors in every book, but readers that are strict on grammar doesn’t see it that way.

Also, a negative review can be something else, such as character building and yes, a reader could help an author become better at writing. A lot of readers are writers, some are authors and some are just writers.

I completely understand your point...I'm not trying to change your mind, I'm just stating what publishers sometimes say ‍to authors. Of course, that could partially be the personal preference of the author. Anyhow, that's another discussion

I have a book out on Amazon with 60% 5 star reviews and 1293 ratings. But when you scroll down to the Reviews, the First review you see, listed at "Top Reviews", is a 1 star review written in 2017.
Now I am annoyed at Amazon for leaving it in the first position for the past 5 years; however, I am not upset with the reviewer. That is their opinion and they are entitled.
I do cringe a bit everytime I scroll down and still see it in that position but heck, I'm human and won't deny it still gets to me after 5 years.

Patrick wrote: "In your perspective, can perfect writing be done without series of reading? How do you classify reading and writing, do you just see them as brother and sister, with little or no assistance from ea..."

You'll find no big-name writer who is not also a reader. (At least, I don't know of any.) When asked, all prominent writers say that reading is part of a writer's job. Stephen King has gone so far to say, "If you don't have time to read, then you don't have time to write." One other writers who's name I forget said that reading is part of the job of a writer.

I don't know what the distinction would be between siblings and siamese twins (since siamese twins are siblings, albeit with an unfortunate medical complication), but clearly anyone who is serious about writing should be serious about reading, too.

As for reading your reviews (a subject brought up by others who commented on this), I can see it both ways. I do tend to read the reviews I get, because I feel I can learn something from them and improve my work. But then, I don't get a ton of reviews at this point, either. If I had thousands, I probably wouldn't bother reading them all, but I might look at some of the good ones and some of the bad ones to get a sense of how my work is being received.