So here are my thoughts:
As most of you know - I don't give ratings on my blog. I have a hard time with them because I'm not sure how to rate a book that is technically excellent but just didn't turn my crank. For example - I really dislike Jane Austen as an author. (hang on, I have to duck a few rotten tomatoes thrown from the crowd) If I were rating Pride and Prejudice simply from my own experience and enjoyment, I would give it a 1/5. Would that be fair? I don't know because I can agree that she is a technically excellent writer, I just don't enjoy her stories. That's why I choose to rate elements of the books I read instead. Having said all that ... places like Amazon insist I give a star rating on the books I review. So I have spent considerable time considering what each star rating should mean.
Three stars is kind of my 'go to' rating. In my mind it means that the book was a decent read; enjoyable enough; but not totally amazing or life changing in any way. (definitely better than any Jane Austen I've ever read, though) Have I received nasty e-mails from authors after giving a three star rating? OH YES! I guess authors all hope that their book will be a five star masterpiece - and I get that. If I had poured so much of my life into a piece of work and then put it out there for public consumption, I'd be hoping for five stars as well. I have nothing but the greatest admiration for authors and artists of all sorts who are willing to make themselves so vulnerable for our entertainment. I, for one, could never do it. Sadly, the reality is that there are mostly three star books out there ... and one persons three star may be another's five. Each book hits each reader differently.
Never would I decide not to read a book with a three star rating. Someone enjoyed it well enough and thinks it is worth reading. Maybe that book will hit me at a five. When I see three stars, I know the book is well written and the story is entertaining, there was just nothing in it that spoke to the soul of that reviewer. Nothing wrong with that. Maybe it will speak to the soul of the next reader. Never have I thought I was being negative about a book I've given three stars.
Those are my thoughts. If you want to read others, check out the linky. If you do a post, feel free to add it. I'd love to hear what you think, so please leave a comment.
I'll pass you my I don't like Austen tomato deflector. You make many valid points. Reviews need to be specific as to what did & did not work for any given individual. We don't like Austen. MANY others do. Just because we don't recommend her books does not mean they are not worth reading, it just means the book did not work for us.
ReplyDeleteSo happy to know that Mark Twain and I aren't alone in our dislike of Austen. Thanks for the comment - and the loan of the tomato deflector.
DeleteYou have gotten emails! Sheesh, a 3 is good! I go by goodreads and that means I freaking liked it. I read 3 books, they are good. I might not love them, but they are good.
ReplyDeleteI once got an email from an author that wanted me to change a 4 to a 5...yeah NO!
O my goodness!! A 4 is reason for a party.
DeleteIt's so funny to me how hung up people get on star ratings. They all mean something different to everyone as I discovered at book club a few months ago. The review is the real tell.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree. The review means so much more than a random star rating.
DeleteAck! I lost my first response...I apologize if two replies from me get posted...let's try again!
DeleteThis is a very interesting discussion. When I first started blogging, I hemmed and hawed about whether or not to use ratings. I felt that the 5-star ones were too unfair, so I used not just half-stars but also quarter-stars. This quickly became cumbersome, especially when I cross-posted my reviews to Amazon, Goodreads, Chapters, etc. There are no options at those sites for anything but full star ratings. So, to simply things, I'm now using just a 5-star rating.
My 3-star rating means I liked it! It's not a wishy-washy, lukewarm feeling about the book. That described my "meh" rating of 2 stars. I agree with others that the substance of the review means more than just the number of stars.
I could see the halves and quarters being hard to work with.
DeleteI believe we always should have the option to add a rating, but it shouldn't be a mandatory entry for review sites.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I wish Amazon would get rid of it.
DeleteDana, thanks for posting about this topic - it's such a relief to hear that readers give much more credence to the actual comments contained within the review than the star rating. Comments are nearly always great feed-back for improvement for the author. BTW, your blog is always SO interesting. I love stopping by here.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Dianne. I'm glad you like it ... and you are always welcome.
DeleteI will use starts on Amazon on Goodreads but I don't use a star system because it is so hard to explain. I think 3 stars describes a solid book that is enjoyable. I know authors probably don't like them but I don't know why. If I see a 3 star book with a description that interests me, I'll read it. I use the smiley faces because I hope it is clear that my ratings represent my emotional connection to the book rather than a numerical value. I think numerical values are important you know in the big picture. When everyone's thoughts create an average. But I think it is all helpful and I readers are smart. Authors should recognize that. We can figure it out.
ReplyDeleteTrue words, Alexis. I always read reviews with the thought in mind that the reviewer and I may not have the same taste. In fact there is one reviewer that I check regularily and if he really dislikes a book - we're talking 1 star max, I know I'll love it. Haven't been wrong yet.
Delete