The Extra Cool Group! (of people Michael is experimenting on) discussion

No, I don't write reviews for entertainment. I just try to give others my POV of it. I'm more interested in reviews that let me know if I should bother reading it. Sometimes added entertainment can get in the way of that.

I write my reviews for myself, really. And maybe as a warning/recommendation for someone like me. Or something.

For me & for others. I write positive reviews for myself, to remind me of the warm fuzzies I got when I read the book. But I admit, a lot of negatives tend to inadvertently be for the public. I've been told numerous times that my "rantviews" are teh shit. Which is...odd. I'm just being myself & apparently myself is amusing. It's like being in a romantic relationship when I write reviews for books I dislike/hate. When it's going good, you barely hear anything from your friend. But when they're going through a rocky patch, they go into "Fuck that bitch! I hate her! I love her!" mode. It's easier to describe what you don't like than what you like. At least it is for me.

I write with me in mind because I don't really believe anyone is going to want to read me rambling. I talk to myself in my head like have conversations in my head. That's how I write, pretty much.

I feel the same way..the hardest books to rate for me always seem to be the 5-star ones.

I started with myself, and a theoretical internet-roaming book reader, as my audience. So, for the most part, I've always had the sense that someone else MIGHT be reading. As time has gone on, though, I see a much more specific audience.

Because of votes and comments, I have a vague sort of idea of what kinds of reviews many people in my audience like. That said, I think my reviewing style has evolved more based on my knowledge of what people on this site can do with their reviews than on the wish to necessarily please my audience. Now I shall name drop and vote whore. Manny's reviews, especially his reviews for some science fiction, first put the idea in my head that I could do creative-writing-as-review reviews (i.e. meta-reviews).

I suppose this discovery also influences how I see my audience, though: with meta-reviewers reading, and with other reviewers who deal with Important Issues, and other deeply reflective, personal reviewers reading, I want to be better than ALL of them at ALL of these reviewing methods. While simultaneously being so funny my readers die from lack of oxygen due to uncontrollable laughter.

I'm not any of these things, but that's the goal.

Thank you kindly, Caris. Does that mean I can take Credit for your reviews now?*



*I just noticed that, because I was thinking of the capital C at the beginning of your name, I capitalized the word Credit. Hahahahahah, so funny!

OKay, it sounds better than nothing. Kool. Thanks, Karis.

Caris wrote: "as soon as Eh! started reading them, I feel like, in some way, I started to consider her as an audience."

Shove off, Michael, obviously all the Credit and Kredit are mine.

Or should I apologize for the resulting blossoming of our little flower?

Mostly for me. I tend to be a more stringent critic of my writing than anyone else manages to be. There are occasions where I'll do rewrites based on comments, but usually I feel it was less a failing of the original review than the inability of the commentator to comprehend the finer points of my review.

It can be fun to do artsy, complex, affected reviews, but it sure does confuse and upset people.

Me. I enjoy writing them. Most of my reviews remain unread by anyone else (or uncommented & unvoted on anyway) so if I didn't enjoy writing them for myself, it would be really, really sad.

The idea of being creative is fantastic. The problem is that I'm not.

I write the review for whoever finds value in it, and because I want to share my good experience of the book with others. Consequently I've written very few negative reviews (mostly two-liners) because I avoid reading something I think I won't enjoy, and to be honest, I'm incapable of amusing myself machine-gunning a book I didn't like (and other people do it better to riotous effect). I have the attention span of a flea, so I fall out of a book with very little effort. That's hardly the author's fault.

I write a book review for the audience in my head.

Usually, my audience is a juvenile, bored, quasi-intellectual with a short attention span who is often times senile and probably mostly incontinent. Also, my audience likes pictures and hostile rants. And Lolcats. I don't know why.

Usually, my audience looks like this:



They always jeer at me and viciously attack my self-esteem until there is nothing left but the hollowed-out shell of a former human being.

At that point, I usually hit 'post'.

You're being mobbed by Muppets?



I get the impression she thinks you're fab!

So that's why old Statler and Waldorf dumped me...

Those two old flirts are sleazy bastards. They dump me every review and only return to jeer at me.

Mainly myself. If someone else finds them helpful or entertaining, so much the better. I like to write, so I approach reviews as art and creative writing.

LOL Kat. I write mostly for me because I enjoy it and to purge myself of emotions brought on by a book be it horrid or fab. My reviews differ depending on my mood. Sometimes I'm super sweet and coherent other times I rant and rave like a lunatic, sometimes I'll have nothing to say about a book and I'll get lazy and will only write a line or two. I write to help myself remember what I've read years down the line and to keep me sane. If people like my reviews that makes me happy too. I probably need medication but my health insurance sucks ;)

Book reading and reviewing definitely improves my mental health, BarkLess. I can honestly say that my book-reading habit has saved my life a few times.

Me too Danielle, especially in my younger years. When things were awful I could always hide away in a book. Without books I don't know what I'd do!

Same here, BarkLess!

I'm reasonably certain there is no audience for my reviews but I write for myself. So far. I await undeserved fame to turn my head.

I started out with only a few sentences on my reviews just for me, to maybe go back and remember why I liked/disliked a certain book...then one day, someone "liked" my review! and more people...and now I write pages for everyone to read :) Then I got a blog and I review there too...reviewing is helpful as well. I can't tell you how many times I've brought up reviews on GR to see either the book sounds like my taste, or if any of my friends would want to do a buddy-read with me.

For myself foremost, mainly to jumpstart my brain out of the creative coma it's been in for ages.

I write my reviews for myself, I tend to process things in writing (which is why I don't rate things in most cases until after I've written a review). But I am aware of who reads my reviews. I know that Karen reads all my reviews, that mfso reads some of them, I perceive him as reading my philosophy/nonfiction reviews more, but I don't know if that is actually true. I know recently msmurphy has read a lot of my reviews. I don't so much right to those people as an audience, but I do try to avoid insulting them. When I reviewed Jonathan Coe I was trying to be nice about him because Karen liked him, just like she was being nice in her review of nick harkaway.

On the other hand I also sometimes do things because I am combating an opinion of an audience. For example, originally I gave the new foer book 5 stars because I knew all my friends thought it was stupid, and I wanted to get their attention and point out that they were wrong and it was well done.

I think the biggest effect for me is the audience that I don't have. I mean on myspace I'm dealing with a couple of exes and a lot of religious people. On facebook I have a number of those same religious people that I'm friends with, almost my entire family (from my grandmother to my 11 year old sister) and a lot of the people I work with (both at the store and research and from when I was at the detox). So as a general rule those cites have to be heavily censored and I don't feel like that's important here since no one actually knows me well enough or cares enough to be disappointed in most cases.

Caris wrote: "When I first started writing my GR reviews, they were just for myself. But as soon as Eh! started reading them, I feel like, in some way, I started to consider her as an audience. Do you write revi..."

I think of my reviews as a masturbatory exhibitionism. That is, when I'm cognizant of writing them because sometimes I wake up on top of the computer. Some of those times I'm naked. All of those times the monitor shows Caris's profile page.

my reviews are delicate snowflakes - every one unique and beautiful. then they melt and are awful.

Someone left a cake out in the rain.

I think the biggest effect for me is the audience that I don't have. I mean on myspace I'm dealing with a couple of exes and a lot of religious people.

Ah, that's a good point, and I agree. I worry that coworkers might stumble across my Facebook profile, so I keep it fairly mild-mannered. But, I feel fairly safe from the Muggles on here, so I can really let my pants down. Uhh, hair down.

I've heard rumor my mom is joining the site to read my reviews...guess I'll find out whether that changes anything.

my dad is on here

i write my reviews for karen's dad.

my dad is on here

Ah, that explains the stark lack of profanity, and the general inoffensiveness of your every comment. Do you find yourself less likely to say cunt or fucktard with him on here?

never. these are our pet names.

My daughter is on here. (Not Karen.) I never watch my language & I don't think she does either. Neither of us ever has much in the real world either. Sometimes that isn't a good thing. There are things parents & children just shouldn't know about each others lives.
;-)

I posted a like to an article about steak and blowjob day on facebook and my mom liked it.

I don't think people really should worry about their parents

Both my parents are on GR, and a sister. Only Mum writes reviews with any frequency; my sister once in a blue moon. They are unsurprised by my language.

I mostly write reviews to the people I'm in conversation with on GR. I forget Dad is going to read my reviews, because he never makes comments. I try to be aware that the authors - the living ones anyway - may read these reviews, especially if they are Goodreads authors. (Although I've been bitten by writing about a book where the author was not a GR author, thinking I was safe. Nope. Turned out okay - he's awesome.) Doesn't mean I won't dislike a book, but I try to make my criticisms about the book, and not the author. Well, sometimes I slip, but I don't think Chris Paolini gives a shit what I think, which is fine by me.

My mom is on GRs, but I don't say anything in reviews that I don't think she should hear. We read a lot of the same books anyway. My sister is on here too, and the same thing applies. Most of the people in my family who might judge my reading tastes aren't big readers and wouldn't be on GRs anyway.

Mostly for myself. Sometimes I try to keep in mind that other people are reading it too, but rarely.

"We write to taste life twice, in the moment and in retrospect."
— Anaïs Nin

I agree with you, Jasmine. I don't edit or expect my kids to either. We certainly don't much face-to-face.
;-)

It's mostly for myself. Although, it is nice to hear from someone who really likes reading your thoughts. It gives you a little boost, be that ridiculous or not.

Initially the reviews were to make me slow down and think about the books. That is still a primary reason.

However I discovered whole arguments happening about reviews (Keely is who I first discovered), and found myself enjoying the conversations.

Since then I definitely write the reviews with readers in mind. I put more effort into the reviews now.

I have a whopping 7 friends at the moment, which is just reflective of how new I am to GR and that I am not the type of person to have 500 facebook friends, it has nothing to do with me being a smelly old hermit. I think considering a friend reading my review makes me more concious of my spelling, my grammar etc, none of which I am very good at (*ahem* because I am a reformed WoW playing math and IT geek).

I write mostly for myself. I have a memory only a mad cow could love, so began keeping a log of quotes and passages I liked from books I had read. That evolved into a summary, in case I ever needed to summon info on the book. And that evolved to the one-paragraph blurbs I put on GR when I first signed on in 2008. Today, I put considerable effort into my reviewing, sometimes bringing in information from interviews, or from professional reviews, but I enjoy what feels to me to be the honing of craft of sort. I truly enjoy writing and facing the discipline of cranking out eight pieces a month is giving me plenty of exercise with which to tone my writing muscles. God knows, my biological ones could use some as well, but alas. So, while I truly love the feedback I get here, the likes and the comments, I write mostly for myself, working on, hopefully, my own scribbler six-pack.

I was a techie for over two decades and those muscles never got a workout, so there is much time to make up for here.

Even if I don't care for the book or the whizz-bang hi-technology of the review, I 'm often AMAZED by the effort and enthusiasm of my fellow reviewers. It seems to me to be a very cool thing. Keep on keeping on!

I write for anyone who's interested I suppose. I browse reviews fairly often when I'm trying to decide whether or not to add a book to my rather considerable "to be read" list. I'll read both good and bad reviews and see what the points are and if I find that having read several reviews by the same person and I often agree I probably give that review more weight.

So, I'm telling anyone who cares to read a review what I think of a book. If it's subjective (and it usually is) I point that out to. As for entertainment value...sometimes a book just cries out to reviewed in an entertaining way. Who am I to deny it?

I have been thinking about this one more.

I originally joined this site so that I could post my reviews so that I could look over them and be refreshed about the book. Doing this really requires all my reviews to be hidden due to spoilers.

Then I thought, if they are hidden they are less likely to be read. So suddenly I found the way I am writing, and the reason I am writing my reviews has hugely changed.

I would love to be able to have two reviews (a spoiler and a spoiler free review). Or even a public and a private review. I know there are private notes, but they are small.