Review v. Reality

L.Jones · Apr 7, 2007

Okay, I'm sensitive. I admit it. Bear with me, this is long - but I bet there are others who feel this way too.
I have seen a couple reviews of my May book out and about - one nice, one snarky. Not too surprisingly, they contradict each other, and one of them contradicts their own last year's review of the book that this one is a sequel to - won't bore y'all with detail because obviously they don't matter to the reviewers why should they to ME?

The point is - I do not think for one nano-second that these reviewers READ MY BOOK. And if they haven't read my book what makes me think they've read any books from the top picks to the ones they trash???
I've come to expect this from certain reviewers but am wondering now, is this the new norm? I'm not talking PW or Kirkus here, btw, but established review sites and mags for specific markets.

Has anyone noticed that reviews of books and the realities of them don't match much anymore? That the reveiws themselves are giving less and less useful information that would help you make up your mind about whether to buy a book or hit the library or avoid it completely? There are some mega sellers out there that even after being on the lists forever, I can't decide to read because I can't get anyone to tell me what they are really about - which tells me a lot of people are buying/checking out books they are not reading, either, come to think of it!!

When I worked in a bookstore I came to believe that people buy books because they trust the person who tells them about it - from Oprah to the lady next door. Or even buy them because they loathe the person who told them not to read it.
So I think reviewers are doing themselves (as well as authors) a disservice when they 'review' books they have not read, or at least gone over thoroughly (example - years ago had a protagonist's marriage break up when her hubby arrived at their daughter's graduation in full drag insisting people call him/her Starla - the whole book this man was in drag and multiple reviewers referred to it being a standard cheating husband story- because it didn't mention the cross-dressing on the cover, I guess). I just wish I knew who to 'trust'.

sigh

Maybe I am just too naive.
At least that's what the Easter Bunny said when he bounced by and sold me some real estate in Eggstralia a minute ago.
Annie
Luanne Jones
Heathen Girls - out in mass market reprint Aprl 07 - Mira Books
THE SOUTHERN COMFORTS - out May 07 - Mira Books

Jamesaritchie · Apr 7, 2007

Reviews

I stopped paying attention to reviews after my first novel, and I don't think I've ever had a really bad review. But I have had many that contradict.

Someone once said that if you believe the good reviews, you're honor bound to also believe the bad ones. I don't believe either. I'm more concerned with where I'm reviewed than with how.

CheshireCat · Apr 7, 2007

My advice?

Ignore reviews. Good, bad, or indifferent, ignore 'em all.

Each is only one person's opinion and, as you pointed out, too often seems an opinion of the book jacket, or a couple of paragraphs provided by the publisher, or merely an excuse for the "reviewer" to hold forth and sound intelligent. (Or not.)

I don't believe 90% of the readers out there buy according to some review they read. I believe they buy books for one or more of the following: They already know the author's work and enjoy it; they like the cover enough to pick it off the shelf and the cover copy intrigues them; someone recommended the book or author; they're looking for a particular kind of book and just browsing the shelves.

In any case, your life and career will be much less stressful if you ignore reviews.

victoriastrauss · Apr 7, 2007

I've had my share of annoying reviews. I'm convinced that the Booklist reviewer didn't read either of my last two books, or at best skimmed them. However, I've also gotten thoughtful reviews from reviewers who clearly devoted time and consideration to reading and evaluating.

I admit I do pay attention to reviews--even Amazon reviews, which I know is dumb--but if I get upset, which I sometimes do, I try to remind myself that it goes with the territory, and is part and parcel of putting yourself out there.

I'm also a reviewer for several publications, and I try to keep the above in mind. I never review a book unless I've read it cover to cover, and my goal is to write the kind of thoughtful review that I myself would appreciate receiving (however, this doesn't necessarily mean a positive review).

- Victoria

Claudia Gray · Apr 7, 2007

I review books on a freelance basis -- all non-fiction, but still, it's reviewing. I've always read the entirety of each one, and I try very hard to write a fair, accurate proposal.

One thing worth considering, though -- I have had editors make changes that, although they don't introduce factual errors, definitely shifted the tone of my review in ways I wasn't as comfortable with. You might be looking at a similar situation.

scribbler1382 · Apr 7, 2007

As others have said, ignore reviews. You'll never please all of the people all of the time, but the ones you don't please for some reason always seem to be the most vocal.

I think it was Dean Koontz who added to this advice by saying "if you pay attention to the good reviews, you have to pay attention to the bad ones, too. So ignore them all."

Sofie · Apr 7, 2007

My grandfather, my grandmother, my mother and I were all in the book reviewing business at one point. My mother still reviews books on a weekly basis. I can't speak for every single reviewer out there, but I know for a fact that my family, and our colleagues, did indeed read the books we were paid to review.

I think that writers should avoid reading reviews of their own books, unless they are quite thick-skinned or don't really care. Otherwise, it really serves no other purpose than to make you upset, annoyed or paranoid (well, sometimes it can be a nice ego boost too, of course!). The most embarrassing thing I ever experienced as a reviewer was when a writer wrote a retort to a review one of my colleagues did.. the newspaper decided to run the retort, and it was absolutely excruciating to read, because while I could understand how he felt, he came off as being absolutely pathetic and aggressive.

So yeah, definitely, don't pay attention to the reviews!

Silver King · Apr 7, 2007

For goodness sake, don't ignore all the reviews. Be sure to read the ones that praise your work.

Tish Davidson · Apr 7, 2007

Off-track

I know this is off track, but someone in India wrote a really good, thoughtful review of my prejudice book on Amazon. It was there for a while and then it and the School Library Journal review both disappeared. Anyone have this experience with Amazon? Neither review appeared to violate any of their policies.

veinglory · Apr 7, 2007

One thing I would question is whether reviews can be contradictory. One person can find a book too fast paced, and another find the same book too slow. Even if they didn't read the book propoerly that is part of what you discover about how well that book worked fr that reviewer (i.e. it didn't grab them).

I read reviews of my stuff like I read critiques, but with more distance and skepticism. Sometimes I find them very useful, but they aren't for me.

L.Jones · Apr 7, 2007

Ya know after 11 years publication (this is my 27th book) I GET the review thing - I do read them, though, can't help it. I also have to smile at the urging to igonore reviews in the context of 'here, take some advice posted on a web board but ignore reviews' C'mon, ya'll. you're good but you're not going to make me change my bad habits.

Even though it's from a personal vantage point, it wasn't so much a personal thing as a professional thing. Now another long time author, Victoria, reports its happened to her so that makes me think we're onto something.

Have had tons of reviews, I'm just saying it has become clear that over the last few years reviewers are not reading my books (which I can tell for sure since I know them) and some books of people I know and at least one major name author whom I've read- who gets reviews from a very highly respected place that read like they are saying "what the hell, people are going to buy scads of this, so it must not be that bad but we didn't read it so we're going to say stuff that could apply to this book or whatever I had for lunch", I can't help but think this is a trend. Has no one else noticed?

Even though they didn't read the book they still review it, giving info and opinions AS IF they did. That's the rub!
It's one thing to say - it just didn't grab me, here's the summary. Or summary plus, a book for people who like XYZ. PW does this kind of thing all the time. It's another to make comments on things that aren't in the book as a reason for not liking it, or FOR liking it.

Disappearing Amazon reveiws - I've heard of that. Not sure what the reason, but you can contact them and ask.

Annie
Luanne Jones
Heathen Girls - out in mass market reprint Aprl 07 - Mira Books
THE SOUTHERN COMFORTS - out May 07 - Mira Books

Silver King · Apr 7, 2007

L.Jones said:
Have had tons of reviews, I'm just saying it has become clear that over the last few years reviewers are not reading my books...

Perhaps I'm naive, but how does one go about reviewing a book he or she hasn't read? Do they simply rely on what's been said by other reviewers?

CheshireCat · Apr 7, 2007

I also have to smile at the urging to igonore reviews in the context of 'here, take some advice posted on a web board but ignore reviews' C'mon, ya'll. you're good but you're not going to make me change my bad habits.

Yeah, it does seem paradoxical, doesn't it? I admit I don't always take my own advice to ignore reviews -- but it's almost always because someone sends me a review or I stumble on one. And it took me a couple of decades of reviews to really learn the lesson, sometimes quite painfully. (Friends used to joke that we should consider it a badge of honor to be trashed by PW, thus turning a painful negative into a kind of positive.)

It is true that if you give a positive review a certain weight or importance, over and above being one person's opinion, then you have to do the same for a negative review. But it's also true that some reviews sting or please more than others; the first time I got a totally positive review from PW, for instance, I remember reading it through about three times looking for the knife. LOL And then there are those well-established review publications, like Kirkus and the Library Journal, and the NY Times; bad reviews from them can make you really squirm, and good ones can give you a totally unjustified high opinion of yourself.

But IMO, the real danger today is the insane number of "reviews" on the internet. Those are the ones writers should avoid. Everybody with a page or a site or a blog can and usually does offer their opinion on what they're reading. Which is fine, great, free speech and all that. But there's often an agenda of sorts, or an axe to grind, or just plain jealousy or envy.

That's what can be and often is so destructive to writers, especially new ones. Because confidence in our work is hardwon, and often the only thing standing between a writer's true voice and an inexperienced or overzealous editor's attempt to "improve" the work is the author's faith in his or her ability. Because you can't fight for it if you don't believe you really do know what you're doing.

Don't let anybody undermine that. Believe me, even the good reviews aren't worth the risk.

David I · Apr 7, 2007

I think you're right that some reviewers are essentially skimming the books as though it is a third-grade book report due tomorrow. I sympathize with thier plight, but think they ought to be a damn sight less definitive about their opinions about books they sort of paged through. I have seen too many cases where we couldn't possibly have read the same same book--where the reviewer not only disagreed in areas where disagreement is possible, but also misreported the storyline.

Artists who want to be writers, read the reviews; artists who want to write, don’t.
William Faulkner

johnzakour · Apr 8, 2007

I read all the reviews I come across and try to take what I can from each of them, good or bad. I'm a big fan of positive mental attitude though, so I take more from the good than I do the bad.

PeeDee · Apr 8, 2007

Reviews would matter much less to me than if some reader came up and shook my hand and said, "I really loved your book," or "I'm sorry, I just couldn't get into your latest novel."

Reviews are written to be read by audiences. Take 'em, even the good ones, with a grain of salt.

And who cares? Either way, whatever they say, you have to square with yourself and then begin writing The Next Thing.

maestrowork · Apr 8, 2007

I used to get upset about bad reviews -- I thought a bad review would just kill my career. But then I realized it didn't and wouldn't. And I also realized that not every book got reviewed -- and it was actually an incredible thing that Publisher's Weekly took the time to review my book.

And now, it actually makes me feel good that someone would take the time to read the book and review it, and it saddens me when someone would read it then not say a word -- that means they don't feel good or bad enough about the book to either rave about or trash it. I'm kind of jealous of someone or a movie who has 400 reviews -- half good and half bad. At least, that means people are passionate about the book to talk about it.

When you look at imdb and see that 300 has like 150 reviews and yet some other movie has 10, or go to Amazon.com and the Da Vinci Code has 600 reviews (both praises and scathing reviews) and some have 1 -- that's pretty pathetic and you'd know what I'm talking about....

popmuze · Apr 8, 2007

I think reviews are extremely important. How else are you going to get all those excerpts on the back of the paperback edition from eighty three different publications all extolling how you're the greatest thing since Norman Mailer?

I think that's what most people skim when they decide to pick up an unknown book. Or at least that's what most bookstores skim when they decide whether to stock a book or to put it up front with the notable new arrivals.

I think a book without good reviews is like a tree falling in the forest.

Plus, good reviews tend to create an avalanche effect among book review editors deciding whether to review your book: Variety to Entertainment Weekly to People to USA Today to Time to Newsweek to the NY Times = Best Seller List.

Maybe 10% of books accomplish that trifecta, but it's usually the same 10% reviewed everywhere.

johnzakour · Apr 8, 2007

The only review that has ever upset me is the NY Times one of my video game. The reviewer said some nice things but also some not nice things which he said he understand were due to budget limitations. Don't really know why that bothered me but it did.

Jamesaritchie · Apr 8, 2007

popmuze said:
I think reviews are extremely important. How else are you going to get all those excerpts on the back of the paperback edition from eighty three different publications all extolling how you're the greatest thing since Norman Mailer?

I think that's what most people skim when they decide to pick up an unknown book. Or at least that's what most bookstores skim when they decide whether to stock a book or to put it up front with the notable new arrivals.

I think a book without good reviews is like a tree falling in the forest.

Plus, good reviews tend to create an avalanche effect among book review editors deciding whether to review your book: Variety to Entertainment Weekly to People to USA Today to Time to Newsweek to the NY Times = Best Seller List.

Maybe 10% of books accomplish that trifecta, but it's usually the same 10% reviewed everywhere.

You get them from bad reviews. Just snip out a sentence that sounds good when taken out of context. "This is not great literature," becomes "...great literature."

But I doubt anyone really buys books based on those cover blurbs. I sure hope not, anyway.

It isn't reviews that get writers that trifecta, it's sales numbers, or the writers name.

Being reviewed is nice, where where nearly always counts for far more than how. They say a good review in the right place can sell 100,000 copies, and a bad review in the same place can sell 90,000 copies.

But even this isn't really true. Remember "The Bridges of Madison County." At the time it held the record for most bad reviews and fewest good reviews. Probably still does. I'm not sure that book ever had a good review. Nearly all teh reviews it had were scathing. But it sold and sold and sold and kept selling. If I remember right, it hit number one three times, and was, all told, at the top for over a year.

Reviews in the right places do seem to sell books, or to get them started, but it doesn't seem to matter much at all whether the review is good or bad. The vast majority of readers just do not care about reviews one way or the other, and probably never even read them.

priceless1 · Apr 8, 2007

Silver King said:
Perhaps I'm naive, but how does one go about reviewing a book he or she hasn't read? Do they simply rely on what's been said by other reviewers?

A lot of reviewers paraphrase the sell sheet that accompanies the galley. No one but the publisher would recognize it as such, and it's annoying as hell.

L.Jones · Apr 8, 2007

Interesting stuff here. I guess it also goes to what one sees as the purpose of a review. Do readers care? Do writers take them to heart? Do they serve the reviewer's agenda?

Have long accepted it's to get the name of my book or me in front of as many eyes as possible, which is why the good or bad of it isn't that big of a deal. I have a personal philosophy that if nobody hates my books, then not enough people are reading them.

But if reviewers are giving definitive reviews or indefinite book reports on books that they aren't reading (how do they do this, from what I gather from the mistakes I've seen, they are using a mix - reading other advance reviews, perhaps, and on the writer's history/rep/previous books or reviews they'd done of them but usually using a mix of skimming and blurb-regurgitating (and don't get me started about blurbs that are misleading or get things wrong!)
It just seems like it will have a trickle down effect - if people buy a book and then find it isn't what they expected, do they blame the reveiwer or the author?

My guess is author, as they have long forgotten the review.
Same for mistakes on blurbs, mistakes in books, bad covers, for those people tend to write and tell the author to shape up

Annie
Luanne Jones
Heathen Girls - out in mass market reprint Aprl 07 - Mira Books
THE SOUTHERN COMFORTS - out May 07 - Mira Books (pssst - has a mistake in the blurb, had more than one and they fixed all but one small thing)

popmuze · Apr 8, 2007

Jamesaritchie said:
The vast majority of readers just do not care about reviews one way or the other, and probably never even read them.

This may be true, but booksellers do. You'll never see a book prominently
placed in a store that doesn't have dozens of fine reviews from top notch outlets on the back cover. Then word of mouth can take over.

Whether any potential reader pays attention or not, I don't think it's possible to sell a book without getting lots of reviews. One is not enough, maybe ten is not enough, if they're all from your local area.

Unless of course your one review comes from Oprah. But where does she get her information? From the same people who scour the reviews to see which books have gotten the most press.

You think that 1.2 million dollar cat book is going to sell anything without reviews and publicity? The only difference is, with the cat book, the publicity may outweigh the reviews, in that no one is going to buy it because of the reviews, since it will have so much publicity.

scribbler1382 · Apr 8, 2007

Book blurbs aren't reviews. And I think you'll find that most book blurbs by other authors (which are the ones you want) are favors or incestuous tidbits that have nothing to do with the book's contents. That's my take on it, anyways.

CheshireCat · Apr 8, 2007

popmuze said:
This may be true, but booksellers do. You'll never see a book prominently
placed in a store that doesn't have dozens of fine reviews from top notch outlets on the back cover. Then word of mouth can take over.

Well, the thing is, publishers pay booksellers for prominent store placement -- so the reviews are merely one of the more obvious signs of publishing backing. They took the time (or the author did) to send out ARCs and gather reviews and blurbs. The fact that it's placed prominently in the store isn't because of the clutter of review quotes and blurbs on the cover, it's just another aspect of the marketing.

popmuze said:
Whether any potential reader pays attention or not, I don't think it's possible to sell a book without getting lots of reviews. One is not enough, maybe ten is not enough, if they're all from your local area.

You mean sell a book to a publisher? Not true. I know quite a few authors who recently sold on the strength of the manuscript alone.

I know some authors submit manuscripts with blurbs already in place, possibly even "reviews" -- though I doubt the latter simply because most legitimate review publications aren't going to even look at an unpublished work.

But as someone else said, blurbs enthusiastically praising the book are often from pals, or the friend-of-a-friend, or another writer for the publisher or client of the agent. What's more, I think quite a few readers are catching on to that, and dismiss the blurbs accordingly.

Review v. Reality

Mostly purring. Mostly.

Writer Beware Goddess

Write For You, Edit For The Reader

Megalops Erectus

volitare nequeo

Megalops Erectus

Mostly purring. Mostly.

Dangerous with a Keyboard

Where's my tea, please...?

Fear the Death Ray

Last of a Dying Breed

Dangerous with a Keyboard

Last of a Dying Breed

Write For You, Edit For The Reader

Mostly purring. Mostly.