Seperating the Wheat from the Chaff

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by doreenjoy

You're missing my point. Everyone has a different opinion about what constitutes "trash", which is why judgements about "good" and "bad" books will always be subjective.

For proof, do a search on Dan Brown. He certainly has devoted fans, and those who think he is not worthy of publication.

This is the same fallacious thinking that results in the abyss known as "cultural relativity" in ethical standards. If everyone is a critic, well, there are effectively NO critics- no work of art can be judged by a rational standard.

I think it is possible to have rational standards of criticism in the arts; as for Dan Brown, sorry, he's just a "bad" writer. Most bestsellers are poor works of literature.....

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

The traditional publishing business has become too insular and exclusive to those who are already on the inside to even allow those on the outside a chance to get in. It's a "castle" mentality: Those on the inside consider themselves the elite, those on the outside are considered to be peons, and the longer the elite stay inside and keep the peons outside, the better off they'll be.

Well, I think that's taking it a little far. IMHO, there is crap and there are good books. I have tried "non-traditional" books, those on ebook sites that were not published by a traditional publisher, and was very disappointed in each case.

It is hard enough to find good books published by traditional publishers; if I wanted to sift through poorly written works in hopes of finding something tolerable, I would be an editor tasked with reading th slush pile submissions.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by wgrimm

This is the same fallacious thinking that results in the abyss known as "cultural relativity" in ethical standards. If everyone is a critic, well, there are effectively NO critics- no work of art can be judged by a rational standard.

I don't think Doreen was exhibiting fallacious thinking, she was right. Most people decide for themselves, rather than defer to some 'higher' (usually self-appointed) authority.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by wgrimm

This is the same fallacious thinking that results in the abyss known as "cultural relativity" in ethical standards. If everyone is a critic, well, there are effectively NO critics- no work of art can be judged by a rational standard.

.....

That's where cultural norms come from. Consensus, that doesn't mean that any given individual will agree with the consensus but odds are they will.

[geneven]

I used to be the unpublished manuscripts reviewer for the West Coast Review of Books, so I am certainly familiar with the horrible stuff people can publish.

I pay a lot of attention to reviewers, though I rarely read a complete review. I find out if the reviewer liked the book, and if I decide I might be interested, I immediately put the review down. I don't want any details -- I will determine the details while reading.

I was a member of an online book group for awhile; eventually I came to a decision. I am making my own journey through literature and I don't ultimately care much about the opinion of other people, except as an initial guideline. Especially the opinions of people who don't know much about the subject they are criticizing.

I don't feel much need to file each book into a quality niche -- this one is great, this not. I just know that this one moved me, this one didn't. I will return to books that didn't work for me but that others liked. I started War and Peace seven times before I got past the moat that is the party at the beginning and into the amazing novel beyond.

There are many bad "ordinary people" reviews -- people who pick up Catcher in the Rye or Catch-22 and hate them. I always wonder what they think they win by not appreciating them. It's like music -- if you hate classical or don't appreciate rap, it's you who lose. Maybe you can't appreciate such things, but there is no reason to be happy about it. You might as well be smug about not enjoying a beautiful day. To miss that enjoyment makes you less.

[BlackVoid]

Originally Posted by kennyc

What I'm saying is there is a greater need for trustworthy reviewing of ebooks than there was in the print world.

Just forget about it. There was never trustworthy reviewing and there is none on the web and there never will be. It is all about personal taste / preference. Good reviews, awards, high price, number of sales - these things do not guarantee that you will like the book. They do not even indicate quality. Get excerpts, free short stories from an author and try before you buy.

I NEVER, EVER read reviews before buying a book. More often than not, they reveal the whole plot. Even the back cover blurb is full of spoilers most of the time. With ebooks, I only read the first few lines of the blurb / look at the cover (very misleading most of the time though, plenty of good books with cheesy covers) and decide to try or not.

And there are plenty of free books out there that are quite good.

So how to find the next book / author:
- user book lists on Amazon
- also bought list on Amazon
- forums like this
http://whatshouldireadnext.com/search
http://www.literature-map.com/

[BlackVoid]

Originally Posted by geneven

There are many bad "ordinary people" reviews -- people who pick up Catcher in the Rye or Catch-22 and hate them. I always wonder what they think they win by not appreciating them.

And there are an equal number of good "snob people" reviews who worship books that are not even worth the paper they have been written on. I always wonder what they think they can win by worshiping rubbish.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by BlackVoid

Just forget about it. There was never trustworthy reviewing and there is none on the web and there never will be. It is all about personal taste / preference. Good reviews, awards, high price, number of sales - these things do not guarantee that you will like the book. They do not even indicate quality. Get excerpts, free short stories from an author and try before you buy.

Well-written reviews from people I trust will tell me whether or not I'll enjoy the book. And the fanfiction community has a whole set of protocols around spoilers in reviews; we've got quite a few people who can give reviews with enough insight and description to let people know if they'd like the story, but avoid spoiling people for crucial plot points.

The idea that you can never tell if you'll like the book without reading it, or others like it by the same author, is pure hubris. Nobody's tastes are that unique.

[kennyc]

I agree elfwreck.

[BlackVoid]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Well-written reviews from people I trust will tell me whether or not I'll enjoy the book.
...
The idea that you can never tell if you'll like the book without reading it, or others like it by the same author, is pure hubris. Nobody's tastes are that unique.

I beg to differ. At sffworld.com one reviewer is fond of Joe Abercrombie - I absolutely agree, very good stuff. But this same reviewer also praises Shaman Crossing by Robin Hobb which is absolute trash (for me) - and even manmy Hobb fans agree (see Amazon user reviews). He also likes the Prince of Nothing trilogy by Bakker, which I liked first but hated really bad by the half of the 3rd book.
Also accomplished, well selling authors VERY RARELY get bad reviews, still I do not like all of them.
Yeah, maybe there is a rewiever someplace that has the same taste as myself, but I have not found it yet.

If I like one book by an author, generally I like others as well. The same goes for dislike. That much is true.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by BlackVoid

I beg to differ. At sffworld.com one reviewer is fond of Joe Abercrombie - I absolutely agree, very good stuff. But this same reviewer also praises Shaman Crossing by Robin Hobb which is absolute trash (for me) - and even manmy Hobb fans agree (see Amazon user reviews). He also likes the Prince of Nothing trilogy by Bakker, which I liked first but hated really bad by the half of the 3rd book.
Also accomplished, well selling authors VERY RARELY get bad reviews, still I do not like all of them.
Yeah, maybe there is a rewiever someplace that has the same taste as myself, but I have not found it yet.

If I like one book by an author, generally I like others as well. The same goes for dislike. That much is true.

But you said:

I NEVER, EVER read reviews before buying a book. More often than not, they reveal the whole plot. Even the back cover blurb is full of spoilers most of the time. With ebooks, I only read the first few lines of the blurb / look at the cover (very misleading most of the time though, plenty of good books with cheesy covers) and decide to try or not.

[BlackVoid]

Yep, I read into all of those after reading (trying to read) the book.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by BlackVoid

Yeah, maybe there is a rewiever someplace that has the same taste as myself, but I have not found it yet.

I didn't say that I agreed with the reviewers, just that a well-written review, by someone whose judgment I trust (most professional reviewers are not in this category) will tell me whether or not I'll like the book.

I can learn how someone's tastes are consistently different from mine, and use that understanding. I don't have to agree with their rating to get enough info to know if I'd probably like the book.

I don't have enough disposable income nor free time to pick new books at random based on cover art or the first line of text--I want some assurance that it's worth my effort before I start reading. I don't often find lifelong favorites by following good reviews (by which I mean "well-written, informative even if you don't agree with the reviewer," not "reviews that liked the book"), but I do often find pleasant entertainment.

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

I don't think Doreen was exhibiting fallacious thinking, she was right. Most people decide for themselves, rather than defer to some 'higher' (usually self-appointed) authority.

In one of her posts, she said "So who do you propose would be fit to decide what is "trash" and what is "worthy?"

One man's trash is another's treasure. "

Okay, so I think Manet is a great painter and Monet sucks, or should I say, has no derpth. Are my opinions valid, without logical supporting arguments of any type? Probably not. We expect that critics have some sort of aesthetic training and can provide rational arguments for their opinions. And this is why their opinions are worth considering.

Self-appointed? Is a reviewer for the NY Times Book review self-appointed?

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by kennyc

That's where cultural norms come from. Consensus, that doesn't mean that any given individual will agree with the consensus but odds are they will.

Well, let me ask you a question. The ancient Mayans believed that it was good to sacrifice young virgins- and gthey sacrificed a good many of them. Most of the Mayans, it appears, believed that human sacrifice was a good thing- it was the cultural norm.

So- is human sacrifice good? Were the Mayans doing something that we can all rationally agree was a good thing?

If 20 million readers think that Harold Robbins is a great writer, should we all agree that the ghastliness that he produces is good literature?