Why the hate? Of Goodreads and YA

Nicole River · Apr 11, 2012

So, I just finished the Hunger Games trilogy (which I devoured in a week, but its merits and flaws are another discussion for another thread). I turned to Goodreads to find what I'm going to read next-- preferably YA, preferably with paranormal elements. I have to say I'm new to Goodreads (yeah, I know. I'm behind the rest of humanity...

) and I couldn't help but notice a pattern in user reviews of YA books. Even if the average rating is ok, the top ratings on the page are always a slew of 1 star with really bitchy and nasty reviews. A lot of the time by the same people. Those reviews seem to gather hundreds of likes and comments. (Not that non-YA books are much different, but it's not nearly as bad).

So what I'm wondering is, who are these people and why don't they have anything else to do? If they hate the majority of YA that much, why not go read another genre? Why torture yourself with book after book full of subjects, themes, characters and tropes you apparently loathe? I keep seeing the same criticisms of YA conventions that basically make the genre what it is.

I kind of get the feeling that YA attracts all the hate for the same reason chick lit did a few years back. People resent its popularity because the main target audience is younger women. I'm not saying guys don't read YA (or that there isn't great YA out there that appeals to both genders) but a lot of YA books have a female protagonist and are centered around a romance. And of course, that's horrible and the sign of impending downfall of society in general, because how dare the females and their icky female tastes rule the market of anything?... *sarcasm*

I don't know if this has been discussed before, and I'm sorry if its causes drama. In that case, feel free to delete this post. I won't be offended.

It's just something I noticed and felt the need to share.

Thanks!
Nicole

Becca C. · Apr 11, 2012

I know a lot of those YA reviewers you're talking about. They care so much about YA. The reason they are not afraid to give negative reviews is that they read so much YA that the overdone, the cliché, the sexist, racist, homophobic, etc. really pisses them off. Read those bad reviews. Most of them are not slamming the book for no reason. There's a lot of justification and damn good reasons why they don't like the book. And those same reviews have YA books they ADORE. Go look at the reviews for The Book Thief, Between Shades of Gray, Anna and the French Kiss, and dozens of others, and you'll see those same reviewers squealing like fangirls.

YA paranormal is full of sexism and that's probably the number one reason you'll see it criticized on Goodreads.

shiva777 · Apr 11, 2012

Becca C. said:
YA paranormal is full of sexism and that's probably the number one reason you'll see it criticized on Goodreads.

Curious about how you see this manifesting...

-shiva

Nicole River · Apr 11, 2012

Yes, and some of the negative reviews are well-argumented and I can agree with many of the points they make. But for every well-written, articulate review there are three just unabashedly mean ones, with no real reasons why the book was so unspeakably awful. It's those that bother me, specifically.

Also, I'm not a believer in extremes. For me there are few books that deserve 5 stars and just as few that deserve 1 (or according to the mean reviews I'm talking about above, "if I could give this zero I would"). The majority of the one-star books have at least one or two redeeming points. And even the recognized, critically acclaimed "greats" are rarely without flaws.

Renee Collins · Apr 11, 2012

I've noticed this as well. Most popular YA books have a 1 star at the top. I think there are several reasons for this.

-Snarky reviews are more fun to read. They just are. Even if I loved a certain book, for some reason I don't particularly get a kick out of reading a gushy review. But if I didn't like a book, I admit it can be rather entertaining to read an intelligent and funny negative review.

I feel a little guilty about that, but I think a lot of people are the same way. And so that contributes to why some negative reviews get a lot of likes. (I will say that I strongly DO NOT like when a negative review is just one long "this books sucks and is garbage and the author is a loser" rant.)

-Another reason could be bandwagoning. People are irritated that a certain book gets a lot of positive buzz, so they seek out the bad reviews on Goodreads and click like, whether or not they read the book.

-And even if they did read the book, I think they're more likely to seek out validation that other people hated it and noticed the same things that drove them crazy than someone who loved the book. Especially if it has a lot of popularity.

iRock · Apr 11, 2012

Nicole River said:
So what I'm wondering is, who are these people and why don't they have anything else to do? If they hate the majority of YA that much, why not go read another genre?

Those kinds of "mean girl" reviews often say more about the reviewer than the book. Being cleverly snarky wins a reviewer a whole lot of attention, and some people really love attention.

The "like" button is the new ego booster.

Nicole River · Apr 11, 2012

iRock said:
Those kinds of "mean girl" reviews often say more about the reviewer than the book. Being cleverly snarky wins a reviewer a whole lot of attention, and some people really love attention.

The "like" button is the new ego booster.

I see. Social media changes, but mean girls are forever.

And Renee, I think you have a point, hype backlash plays a role.

lolchemist · Apr 11, 2012

I'm new to GoodReads and the main reason I joined was because of all the YA Author drama/ "Authors behaving badly" stuff I've been seeing around on the internet lately. I'm a drama-queen at heart and love me a good old fashioned author meltdown. I also love reading one and two star reviews, especially if the reviewer is stark raving furious while writing them. I don't know why but not only is it funny to me but somehow it has this magical effect on me that suddenly inspires me to write! This is especially true when the reviewer is nitpicking apart everything she felt was wrong with the book.

On the other hand, when reviewers just start writing nasty reviews just for the sake of feeding their own 'like' addictions, I think that's sad.

Niiicola · Apr 11, 2012

I have a review on Goodreads where I said I liked the writing and concept but then listed out all this plot stuff that drove me nuts, and it's the most-liked review of the book. It's not a wildly popular book, but every time somebody comments on or likes my review, I feel a little bit guilty since it's now at the top of the list.

soopykun · Apr 11, 2012

I was terrified of Goodreads, but then my book was added, so I set up an author account. I'm still wary of it, just because of everything that's been going on there over the last few months.

There's definitely some very witty negative reviews there, but I do feel for the authors
when they border on cruel vs constructive.

It's a funny site because it encourages both readers and authors, and the middle ground can get a bit murky. I use it to keep track of what I read, but I don't intend to do any reviews myself.

leahzero · Apr 11, 2012

Goodreads isn't just a review site, it's a social networking site. This means there's an element of the classic popularity contest at work. Popular reviewers get many likes and comments on their reviews, which places them at the top of lists.

I think it's just as bad in the other direction: the star ratings are ridiculously inflated. When was the last time you saw a book get less than 3 stars on average? According to Goodreads, we're living in an absolute Golden Age of fiction, especially when it comes to YA.

Yeahhhhh.

Becca C. · Apr 11, 2012

lolchemist said:
I'm new to GoodReads and the main reason I joined was because of all the YA Author drama/ "Authors behaving badly" stuff I've been seeing around on the internet lately. I'm a drama-queen at heart and love me a good old fashioned author meltdown. I also love reading one and two star reviews, especially if the reviewer is stark raving furious while writing them. I don't know why but not only is it funny to me but somehow it has this magical effect on me that suddenly inspires me to write! This is especially true when the reviewer is nitpicking apart everything she felt was wrong with the book.

On the other hand, when reviewers just start writing nasty reviews just for the sake of feeding their own 'like' addictions, I think that's sad.

I totally agree with this. It inspires me, too. If someone is getting really incensed at just how limp and boring and passive the female MC of the latest bestseller is, I'm going to get pissed off about it too and turn to my WIP and make sure that MC is not the wet rag reviewers hate so much.

You have to remember too that Goodreads is for readers, not for authors. I don't buy the "mean girls" thing. Reviewers share their honest opinions in order to help other readers decide if they want to read the book. Reviews are not for the authors. If an author's feelings get hurt reading their own reviews, they shouldn't be reading them. You need thick skin to be a published author, and if you know you don't have that thick skin, stay away from review sites. I absolutely do not condone the butthurt actions of some authors this year (not naming names but ohhh, I could). I'm 100% on the side of reviewers. They should be able to say whatever they want.

It is, after all, just an opinion.

ETA: re: stars... it's an opinion. What is a 1-star book for one person might be a 5-star to another person. It means very little in an objective sense. People get so hung up on this.

Niiicola · Apr 11, 2012

Also, sometimes good things come from being a highly rated reviewer on Goodreads, although I'm not sure about being super-snarky. My mother has over a thousand books on there and writes really well-developed reviews, and she's been approached and offered ARCs to review a few times.

The_Ink_Goddess · Apr 11, 2012

iRock said:
Those kinds of "mean girl" reviews often say more about the reviewer than the book. Being cleverly snarky wins a reviewer a whole lot of attention, and some people really love attention.

The "like" button is the new ego booster.

That's uncalled-for, in my opinion. Goodreads is like any kind of journalism in a way, except that it's open to the public: you write for an audience. Your audience is all/any of the people who are interested in a book. You want to communicate your ideas about a book and you want to make it fun for people to read. Snark is funny. Snark is fun to read. But snark is often smart. There is no way around that. The more fun it is, the more people are likely to read it. I always read reviews of books before I buy them, because I trust the opinion of my GR friends and I like knowing what they think about these books. It's not about ego.

People tend to have stronger opinions about the books they hate. It's just a fact. Okay, you may have the strongest feelings about books you absolutely love, but let's be honest, most of us have stronger feelings of dislike than like. Always, re: your comment about the 'like' button: I don't 'like' a review to boost the writer's ego. I 'like' it to show agreement with whatever they've written.

Plus, and I don't think I'm alone in this, I like reviews like Niicola's because often I have a feeling of 'I didn't like this...why didn't I like this?' and specific reviews that explain why are interesting to me.

Goodreads is not for authors. It's for readers, and authors need to get that.

soopykun · Apr 11, 2012

But it's not just for readers. It's also aimed at authors to use for marketing, which is why they have author accounts.

For what it's worth, I agree that readers should be able to say whatever they want. And that authors need to be ok with reading negative reviews, or avoid them altogether. And any author tempted to respond to one needs to step away from the computer and eat some chocolate or something.

auriel · Apr 11, 2012

lolchemist said:
I'm new to GoodReads and the main reason I joined was because of all the YA Author drama/ "Authors behaving badly" stuff I've been seeing around on the internet lately. I'm a drama-queen at heart and love me a good old fashioned author meltdown. I also love reading one and two star reviews, especially if the reviewer is stark raving furious while writing them. I don't know why but not only is it funny to me but somehow it has this magical effect on me that suddenly inspires me to write! This is especially true when the reviewer is nitpicking apart everything she felt was wrong with the book.

On the other hand, when reviewers just start writing nasty reviews just for the sake of feeding their own 'like' addictions, I think that's sad.

I feel the exact same way! (About the bolded part.) I love reading the negative reviews on Goodreads, even (sometimes especially) about books I love. It makes me examine my own WIPs to look for the flaws that the reviewers harp on over and again. And, like people have said, I find them entertaining and honest.

The positive reviews are also helpful, but somehow the negative ones are the ones that make me want to GO WRITE. Probably because I feel armed and ready to produce a better manuscript.

Sometimes I wish I could have a few particular reviewers be betas for my own work. They catch everything. And yet, there are some exruciating reviews out there that make me afraid to ever air what I write. I don't think these people hate YA; I think they adore it. Why else exert so much effort into crafting lengthy reviews?

Frankly I appreciate all of them. They help me as a reader and as a writer.

Chanelley · Apr 11, 2012

leahzero said:
Goodreads isn't just a review site, it's a social networking site. This means there's an element of the classic popularity contest at work. Popular reviewers get many likes and comments on their reviews, which places them at the top of lists.

I think it's just as bad in the other direction: the star ratings are ridiculously inflated. When was the last time you saw a book get less than 3 stars on average? According to Goodreads, we're living in an absolute Golden Age of fiction, especially when it comes to YA.

Yeahhhhh.

I agree with this. Popular reviewers will attract more viewers to their reviews. Which is why they get boosted to the top. It doesn't necessarily mean that the reviewer hates YA. There are a few reviewers on Goodreads that have a reputation for being very honest and harsh and while sometimes I don't agree that snark is the best way, it's THEIR way of reviewing.

The problem with Goodreads, I find, is that there isn't a set rating method. One person's 1 star will be another person's 3 star. Sometimes I've reviewed a book and given it 3 stars then read a 1 star review and we've had pretty much the same thoughts.

Becca C. · Apr 11, 2012

Chanelley said:
The problem with Goodreads, I find, is that there isn't a set rating method. One person's 1 star will be another person's 3 star. Sometimes I've reviewed a book and given it 3 stars then read a 1 star review and we've had pretty much the same thoughts.

Why is this a problem? We all have individual tastes, and what some people may hate in a book might not be so bad to another. Life would be pretty boring if we all thought the exact same things. The beauty of reading is how subjective it is.

Sage · Apr 11, 2012

And sometimes 3-star reviews will sound exactly like 5-star reviews. Which is why I always read a 3-star review, because it's basically the average and it means different things to different people.

I rate based on my enjoyment of a book. I'll point out good and bad things inconsistently, but my rating is based on how much I liked it.

Niiicola · Apr 11, 2012

I'm not sure I have any one-star reviews. If I hate a book that much, I stop reading it, and I'm anal about only listing/reviewing books I've finished. So yeah, the numbers are all pretty subjective.

lolchemist · Apr 11, 2012

Becca C. said:
Reviewers share their honest opinions in order to help other readers decide if they want to read the book. Reviews are not for the authors. If an author's feelings get hurt reading their own reviews, they shouldn't be reading them. You need thick skin to be a published author, and if you know you don't have that thick skin, stay away from review sites. I absolutely do not condone the butthurt actions of some authors this year (not naming names but ohhh, I could). I'm 100% on the side of reviewers. They should be able to say whatever they want.

It is, after all, just an opinion.

ETA: re: stars... it's an opinion. What is a 1-star book for one person might be a 5-star to another person. It means very little in an objective sense. People get so hung up on this.

Oh yeah, definitely! I have some HIDEOUS 1-star reviews up on Amazon.com and every single one of them are pretty much "Here is a list of WHY I don't like this book, if your tastes are similar to mine, then think twice!" My main intent is to help readers like me and my secondary intent is to use it as an outlet to vent my frustrations out about the book (I don't have a book blog so...)

But yeah, the best advice for an author is "DON'T RESPOND!" I mean it's delicious fun when they do but it's so bad for their careers and it really pissed me off when one of them was trying to passive-aggressively threaten a reviewer by saying that that reviewer would never get published if she continued being a meanie-pants-doo-doo-head (I'm talking about the #YAMAFIA incident.) DON'T YOU DARE THREATEN THE REVIEWERS!!!

Sage · Apr 11, 2012

I only have one 1-star review, I think, and it was so long after I read the book and so soon after I joined GR that I didn't want to have it be one of the few reviews I had. If I was reading the book today, I would have said why. I tend to be nicer on reviews than I am in my head, though

Becca C. · Apr 11, 2012

I have no qualms about one star ratings and reviews. I have quite a few one star ratings, but I don't know if I have any one star reviews up.

A book has to really earn that one star, though. I don't give them out lightly.

maybegenius · Apr 11, 2012

I tend to view the really tough-nut GoodReads reviewers as a challenge. Sort of like I roll up my sleeves and go, "Okay, if I can impress you, then I can pretty much do anything." Which in reality is a crapshoot, because you can never impress everybody.

I've noticed that people tend to have a verrryyy wide range of what they think "mean" is. Me personally, I have a pretty high tolerance for snark. I don't view something as unabashedly mean unless it's clear to me that the person is actively trying to go for laughs at the expense of the author rather than evenhandedly reviewing the work. That said, I really don't feel like I've come across many GR reviews that were just a bunch of "WANK WANK WANK THIS BOOK IS SHIT AND THE AUTHOR IS A STUPIDHEAD WANK WANK." They happen, yes, but they're rare in my experience. More often than not, the reviewer gives specific examples as to why they disliked the work.

I mean, I imagine that if I ever get to be an oh-so-special GR Author, I'll get at least a handful of snarky reviews, and they'll probably sting a little bit, especially if the reviewer reads something into my work I didn't intend. Even so, I'm expecting it and if they have valid criticism, I'll take it into consideration. If I disagree, well, I'll move on.

Sage · Apr 11, 2012

maybegenius said:
That said, I really don't feel like I've come across many GR reviews that were just a bunch of "WANK WANK WANK THIS BOOK IS SHIT AND THE AUTHOR IS A STUPIDHEAD WANK WANK."

I usually only see this after the author responds poorly to a negative review.

Why the hate? Of Goodreads and YA

with the weird fowl in her userpic

"Every Word is a Spell"

with the weird fowl in her userpic

Plotting . . .

That's how I roll

with the weird fowl in her userpic

Shooting stars.

Twitchy

The colors! THE COLORS!

Twitchy

we're gonna make it out of the fire

Our Lady of Parentheticals

Twitchy

Shooting stars.

Our Lady of Parentheticals

might be a giant

Our Lady of Parentheticals