Quote:
Originally Posted by issybird
Makes no nevermind to me.
The most useful reviews to me are thoughtful two-star reviews. Five-star reviews are useless; people like a lot of carp, as far as I’m concerned. It’s the rare book that gets five stars from me and if I’m looking, it’s because I’m already interested. A good two-star review lets me see if the aspects the reviewer didn’t like are things which resonate with me and that’s very helpful indeed.
And referring to a couple of comments above: the last thing I want to see in a review is a synopsis. That’s what the blurb is for. And I’ve been spoiled a few times by a synopsis and that’s infuriating.
|
If I'm trying to decide whether or not to read a book by an unfamiliar author I look at the two and three star reviews. I figure that way I'm getting the people who thought it was pretty good but had some faults (three stars) and people who didn't like it but didn't find it so completely without merit as to deserve a one star rating.
I hate when people don't tag spoilers, or when they write a detailed summary of the whole story. Maybe they are flashing back to writing book reports in elementary school? I want to know things like: Was it a fast read? Was it slow but enjoyable? Were there plot holes or too many loose ends never tied up?
Now if only I could find those summaries and spoilers when I want them... (Like when I'm browsing library listings, see a description of some thriller, don't want to read it but the blurb has made me knda want to know how it turned out).
I also don't understand why so many people complain about not being able to "connect" with the book or the characters.