Are big name reviews important to you?
Last week on Friday Coffee Chat we talked about whether we are character driven or plot driven readers. Ellie pointed out that I had missed theme driven—probably because I don’t read a lot of theme driven novels! This week, Jennifer at Girls Gone Reading is asking readers about the most influential book they have read. Head over to her blog after you comment on this week’s chat on my blog!
I have also added an index of the previous Friday Coffee Chats in the menu bar under “Events/Features”. If you are interested in the previous topics covered, make sure you check it out!
_____________________________________________________________
This week on Friday Coffee Chat I am asking readers about reviews. While at the Texas Book Festival last weekend, several authors expressed frustration with the New York Times Book Review because the reviews seem to not actually review the book the writer is reviewing. Two authors that spoke at a talk both said that they had read reviews of their books from different media outlets that had very little to do with their own novels. Another author also expressed dismay at a negative reviews of their book in which he said the reviewer had obviously not even read the book.
Media outlets tend to have big pull when it comes to books. Whether it’s the New York Times Book Review, Publishers Weekly, or any other magazine or newspaper that garners thousands upon thousands of readers, this is often where we readers hear the initial buzz about new titles. Even if we don’t read these publications ourselves, it’s often where books get the attention to become bestsellers. I am one of those readers that doesn’t follow the big outlets that feature reviews so I was completely unaware that these big name reviewers review books without even really talking about the book they are reviewing. That was kind of disappointing to hear authors say these things at the festival. Is it true? Do the reviewers really talk more about themselves than they do about the book. Don’t reviewers read the books they review? I scanned through a few different reviews and didn’t really see what they were talking about, but I’m sure that it happens from time to time.
I tend not to get most of my books through the suggestions of friends and even through *gasp* data mined suggestions based on books I’ve purchased online. I even buy books by "new to me" authors that have positive blurbs from authors that I have previously enjoyed reading. The point is, I tend to trust “reviews” from people I know and respect more than a reviewer that is backed by a big name media outlet. My question is, where do my friends and family get recommendations? Is the lowest common denominator these big time reviews?
Another thing one author expressed was irritation at getting a negative review. I actually felt a little turned off by that statement even though I thought the author was really well spoken and I enjoyed what they had to say. Throughout the chats we’ve had on my blog over the past few months, we have all expressed our opinions on books even if we don’t agree with each other. Why is it so bad for someone to practice their freedom of speech and express that they didn’t like the book? It can have a true impact on whether or not the author sells books, but if reviewers were to not review the books they don’t enjoy, I don’t think we as readers would have a true picture of of the books we read. To me, it seems disingenuous to only print rosy reviews of books. We are all different so what is to say that I will enjoy a book to the same degree that one of my friends or family members enjoys? In my eyes the world would be a pretty boring place if we all liked the same thing (and if this were the case, there would be far fewer published authors out there).
So my questions for readers this week are:
- Where do you as a reader find the books you want to read?
- Do you think that the major media outlets publish reviews in their newspapers and magazines that include very little reviewing of the actual book?
- Are you influenced by the big name media review outlets? If so, which ones do you recommend?
- Are you turned off by negative reviews and think that reviewers shouldn’t review books they don’t like? Do you think they should pass the book onto someone they think will like the book?
Logging you in...
Posts
lyndseyjenkins 29p · 753 weeks ago
Zee · 753 weeks ago
I rarely get my recommendations from big media outlets. I think those reviews are often to snobby for me. I don't really want my books for pleasure to be to thinky I get enough of that in school. I need a break. I do think they read the book and review it, those review are just rarely what sells books to me.
I do actually like negative reviews if they are done well. A reviewer that states this book wasn't for me because xyz has taken time to think about the book. The xyz reasons might be just what I like and therefore it is a book for me. A negative review that just says the book sucks but not why is of no use to me though.
bokunosekai 49p · 753 weeks ago
I like reading reviews from fellow book bloggers because they are more honest that big media reviewers.
I trust my instinct most of the time. I go to book stores or library, reading all the blurb on the back cover and then decide whether to buy it or not. My favorite author recommendation is also a good review, I read one of the most amazing Japanese literature, Battle Royale by Koushun Takami, because Stephen King said this is a good book. I read it and I say Battle Royale is an amazing book, I love it so much.
My recent post My Posts in These Awesome Blogs
amymckie 73p · 753 weeks ago
My recent post Review- No Place Left to Bury the Dead by Nicole Itano
Rikki 49p · 753 weeks ago
There was one time that I went and bought a book based on the opinion of a prefessional big name reviewer. For years we had a book review show on TV with four books reviewers (one of them the most known reviewer in Germany, a man I very much admire) and the show was great to watch (mainly because of the arguments going back and forth). They always gave a buying recommendation based on their personal preference for x-mas and one of them recommended a certain book and so went on about it that I got it myself. And it is one of my favourite books. So I suppose you can't say professional reviwers are always wrong :) .
As for the author you mention complaining about the neg. review. Wasn't the complaint rather about the reviewer not having read the book than the actual negative opinion? That's how I understood it unless you are talking about a second author.
Can't see what is wrong with a negative review as long as it is fair. If you put something out there you must expect that not everybody will love it.
My recent post McCafe & libride
lrpresley 92p · 753 weeks ago
The reviews I trust are from a handful of bloggers. Occasionally I'll check out more in-depth reviews on GoodReads or Amazon, but usually that's to see if I'm validated in feeling badly about a book when I really don't like it lol. I also have been known to not pick up a book if it's getting less than a three start rating on GoodReads - I used to not pay attention to that, but after several duds in a row I've learned it's a good thing.
What about books that get all five star reviews from people? Do those books put you on edge? I'm always worried I won't like the book as much as everyone else and then get blasted by people if I write a more negative review. Unlike a lot of people, I really like reviews that aren't glowingly positive and make sure I read the entire thing to see if maybe the book is or isn't for me. I appreciate the honesty.
What I make sure to do with my reviews is link back to a few other bloggers (especially those who felt differently about the book if I have posted a negative review) so readers can judge for themselves if there is anything about the book that might appeal to them.
chachic 47p · 753 weeks ago
Funny that you mentioned negative reviews, it seems like several people have been talking about that lately. I don't mind reading negative reviews because I write them as well. As long as the reviewer explains why the book didn't work out for him/her then I'm fine with it. What I don't like is when a reviewer becomes hateful or spiteful and it seems like the whole review is just full of incoherent rants.
My recent post White Cat by Holly Black
Trish · 753 weeks ago
Interesting questions here. I have never in my life read a NYT review or any other big name paper review. Well, except for the blurbs in People magazine sometimes, but those aren't really reviews.
I trust book bloggers over any other group. I've come to know the tastes of many of them and if said blogger really likes a book and gives me good reasons for liking the book, I can usually tell if I'll like it or not. I trust book bloggers over friends and family members, even!
My recent post The Suspicions of Mr Whicher - Kate Summerscale
Trish · 753 weeks ago
My recent post The Suspicions of Mr Whicher - Kate Summerscale
Trish · 753 weeks ago
PS--I don't like that it made me cut my comment into three pieces. And it took me about 15 minutes to leave this comment. :( Intense Debate Hates me!! :(
scrabblequeen 40p · 753 weeks ago
My recent post Waving The White Flag
Sarah · 753 weeks ago
As to the question(s) -
I don't even READ those big name reviews, much less pay attention to what they are saying. I just don't care. I don't trust them. Even if they aren't getting paid for their perspective, they are still getting paid which to me means that they aren't "real people" writing the review. Ridiculous, but whatever.
I like the blogosphere because it helps me get a much more well rounded, raw feel for whatever book I'm looking into.
In regards to the negative reviews... it really depends on the negative review. If someone poopoos a book without giving any reasons ie: "I hate this book and you should too" end-of-review, I get a little miffed. HOWEVER, if someone has a negative review and they give reasons for why they feel the way they do, I actually respect it. It's easy to sing a book's praises, but its much harder to be negative and point out reasons why you feel that way. I appreciate the honesty it takes to do that.
My recent post The Quantum Thief - Hannu Rajaniemi
Ellie M · 753 weeks ago
Negative reviews don’t deter me either, unless there are too many of them. It really just depends on what is being said about the book and whether or not I trust that persons opinion or not.
Good topic :)
Yvette · 753 weeks ago
My recent post Friday Post Office Loot
Yvette · 753 weeks ago
When it comes to 'literary' type books by long dead authors, I read any and all reviews as I find them. When it comes to non-fiction, I read the NY Times and occasionally The New Yorker and lately more and more, bloggers.
This system is a good way to avoid negative reviews of current fiction, though negativity has a way of making itself known. Still, I'd never let a negative review stop me from reading something I really wanted to read.
My recent post Friday Post Office Loot
iliana · 753 weeks ago
My recent post World Literature
@ratsinabag · 753 weeks ago
So like you, I tend to stick to word of mouth. Before I joined Goodreads though I did not really use the internet or any media source to find out about books. I was a bookshop browser. I'd spend ages in a bookshop just going up and down the aisles picking books up, walking around with them for a bit, putting them back again before finding one I wanted. Nowadays most books I get I have heard of through an online source - people.
I prefer getting reviews and recommendations from people I know, or feel that I know so I can get a sense of who they are and what books they like and if we have similar tastes. Also, because you can talk with a person, you can't with a magazine reviewer.
As for authors who don't like negative reviews - well boohoo. What do they want? Should we bow down to their magnificent authorliness and never say a bad word against them? If they're getting more negative reviews then positive they should probably try listening. Not everyone is going to like a book - I'm sure there are people who think Shakespeare is a load of rubbish but that doesn't lessen his status as one of the literary Greats, does it?
Frankly, if you are in the creative business - music, art, acting, writing you are going to have to expect a negative review. Everyone in that kind of business will get one or two eventually. Some will be more vehement then the rest. Tough shit. Get over it or get out, I say!
I wonder if film directors or actors or anyone else like that goes around demanding that they shouldn't get bad reviews? I don't think they'd get very far.
Unless the reviewer is attacking the author personally and not at all about their book, then a negative review is valid - if not necessary. I'm not always put off by a bad review because sometimes I might be made curious, or perhaps I think I'll like the book anyway.
Reading negative reviews I think are an important process of choosing the next book to read. If you go onto Amazon, or Goodreads to read reviews there is usually a whole range of reviews from loved it to hated it and I like to read one of each at least because it just gives me an idea. The negative review might be for reasons I disagree with or they just might not be important and I'll read it anyway.
It must be difficult I imagine for an author to read negative reviews especially if the reviewer hated it. I can imagine it must hurt their feelings a bit and it probably is very irritating. I doubt anyone would ever enjoy reading a negative review of their own work, but that doesn't mean that authors should argue that people shouldn't write them. I have heard of authors going on blogs and bad mouthing the blogger because they wrote a bad review.
Good authors should take on board criticism - especially if they're getting a lot of it. Getting uptight and playing up doesn't make them sound like professionals. Good authors should accept criticism as a matter of course - not everyone will agree with it. A few negative reviews won't hurt their sales. I mean at least it is a review and not no review and in the end it is just personal opinion. None of us our Gods, reviews aren't gospel they're just opinions.
I will recommend books I haven't liked to other people if I think they'll like it. Most books I end up not liking is mostly just personal disinterest and I accept that other people may like them. There are some books I wouldn't recommend to anyone because I think they're complete tripe, but very few and I usually don't finish those anyway. I'd still accept that others would enjoy them. So even if I write a negative review - it doesn't mean I won't actually recommend the book to someone else, or even share it. However, if I had an author come up to me and complain about a review of mine, the book would end up in the recycling bin and I wouldn't recommend it to a dog.
I can understand people who don't write negative reviews because they only like to review the books they enjoy. I don't think it is a requirement to write a review for every book, like it or hate it. Sometimes I only really want to write reviews for books I would recommend. I try to write honest reviews however - even if I really enjoyed the book I will point out the floors if I did have some issues.
@ratsinabag · 753 weeks ago
chewdigest 47p · 753 weeks ago
I have a super secret way of picking the books that I read. It is so secret that I don't even really know what it is. For work, I am given a huge list that has nothing but genre, title and author and I usually google the titles that jump out at me in the genres that I like. How is that for you, I am even more shallow that those cover art pickers! Titles are important for me. They set the tone.
For personal reading, it is really whim and reading blog posts. Like I was on Amazon the other day and remembered a book that I lost in a move like ten years ago that I never finished. It was called The Lifetime Reading Plan and told you all of the books that you should read to be...well, well read. Then I noticed on the "similar book suggestions" sections 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die, Books that Changed the World by Robert Downs, Great Books by David Denby, and for a change of pace, Bloomsbury's 100 Must-Read Crime Novels. Next thing I knew, I had added 5 books to my basket and checked out. I don't know how it happened!
esigmund 24p · 753 weeks ago
I much prefer these blogger reviews to bigger, high profile reviews. I think bloggers' reviews are more genuine, shorter, and easier to translate into whether I'd like the book or not. I used to read the New York Times Book Review, but I don't any more.
I absolutely think reviewers should write and share negative reviews. I don't think they should be cruel just for the heck of it, but if they didn't enjoy a book, they absolutely have the right to share why. Sometimes I read someone's negative review of a book and think, "Hey, all those things this reviewer hated are things I love in books! I'm going to check this one out." I'm rather wary of a book that it seems every single person who read it loved.
My recent post My Week in Books- October 17-23
artseblis 1p · 748 weeks ago
Negative reviews may affect book sales, but readers are not in the business of selling books, are they? We read books and if we feel so inclined write whether we liked the book or not.
As to professional reviews - sometimes I read them, because they can be fun to read but I have never been swayed by them. These reviews could very well have been written by alien life forms, for all I know. I don't have a personal connection with professional book reviewers.
I trust book recommendations from fellow book bloggers and book club members. I love reading the reviews by other readers. My TBR pile has grown monstrous because of the honest opinion of these people.
The auto-generated recommendations based on browsing and purchase history may be soulless but it sure is useful in bringing to my attention books I may be interested in. So I like Amazon, Shelfari, and other book sites.