Are Edits Really Worse Than a Root Canal?

Here's my latest observation.

If reviewers use "poor editing" as a criteria for marking down a book rating, why do they think they're the exception to that same standard?

Answer: They’re not. We’re not. I am not.

Bear in mind that I am making reference to those reviewers who contribute to organized review sites, not personal bloggers. Although they might find value in this, who knows?

How closely do reviewers follow their favorite authors? How much do they pay attention to the words the writer uses that touch base on what they do? You know, when they talk about not just their characters but the behind-the-scenes goings on?

If readers follow authors on Facebook or Twitter or any of the Yahoo Groups they’re a part of, or the authors’ own blogs, they'll notice discussions about galleys, edits and other components that make up their day beyond the initial creative process. It’s not glorious or fun – it’s hard work, time consuming and exacting. The payoff for readers is a finished product that will inspire imagination and enjoyment.

A review is a cousin of that process. Sure, some might say it’s a distant cousin but it’s related through the written word. We share our opinions of that final product; how it affected us, what worked or didn’t work and what our favorite parts were, or least favorite.  We even point out the things that got missed, like editing.

Reviewers are writers too. We use words to explain and share our opinions and, like authors, we also make mistakes. We know what we want to say but sometimes our fingers just don’t make the connection. From our head to our fingers or pen, weird things can happen. The brain is amazing. It can take words that should be there and insert them for us to see when we are reading it back to ourselves. But those words are actually missing! Therefore, we think it’s perfect and submit it. We never notice, we never question our perfection. Imagine the shock of being told to fix errors!

We know what we want to say but perhaps don’t know the right word, or, perhaps it’s a word not used often and we mess up the spelling. We are fallible. We are human.

I have to ask:

Why don't they use the many and varied tools that writers have access to? Such as: a spell checker, a thesaurus, even the humble dictionary. Why do they resist using them? Why do reviewers get their panties in a twist when their review comes back for edits? Why are they taking it personally when told that their review needs to be tweaked? Why do they think they’re above the process that authors are expected to deal with every day?

Does anyone have some answers for me?
Don't they want their reviews to be respected?

And please don’t respond with, “Well, I am not an writer/author. I‘m just a reviewer.” That is a cop out. You ARE a writer – you’re not reading this because you are singing or a tap dancing. You. Are. Writing! Ergo: a writer.

Edits - a necessary component for anyone who takes what they write seriously. You can even call it a necessary evil. Embrace them – they’re actually good for you.

Taking it a step further – if a reviewer wants to review for multiple sites, realize they can’t take the cookie-cutter approach. Nor can they expect one format to be accepted by all of the sites they belong to. Not only that, but they can’t re-use the same review because of intellectual property rights.

Did you know that?

In addition, some sites have an attitude of laissez faire while others require a level of professionalism and are more proactive. Most are willing to work with their reviewers and help them grow, and others don’t put in that kind of investment. Ask yourself – What kind of site do I review for?

If you don’t want to put in much effort - the thrill is just getting to share your opinion, then go with the sites that aren’t picky- they’ll be a good fit.

However, if that is your modus operandi and you start to review for a site that requires attention to detail, with the burden  falling on the reviewer for submitting a decent review the first time, then it might not be a good match at all. A reviewer will be faced with their lack and their review will come back for edits. For some it’s a hard pill to swallow. For some reviewers, it’s so insulting that they just up and quit.

HOW DARE THEY!! OTHER SITES LIKE MY STYLE JUST FINE!!!

That kind of reaction isn’t very professional. And even if you don’t review for an organized site, certainly it comes across as very high school-ish and thin-skinned. You can’t tell me that a job in the corporate world doesn’t have moments of criticism, correction and instruction. If a person can survive that, then certainly a little editing request shouldn’t be the end of the world. Suck it up and do what you do with pride and honor.

You are worth it. Your opinion is worth it. The story is worth it. Edits help you learn, grow and create a better final product. What can a reviewer possibly find objectionable about that?

Someone, please tell me.
Because I think edits are much better than a root canal. Any day.

Let Me Count the Ways

Let me count how many reviews that are out there on the same book. Ok, I lost count.

I picked Shadowfever by Karen Marie Moning. I loved that book and I reviewed it. It was a difficult review to do because so many scenes throughout the book were key to the movement of the plot and were so incredibly specific, mentioning them would have been divulging spoilers and that is what reviewers need to avoid. How did others deal with it? I was curious to see.

This first one is funny. No, not the review. The fact that the reviewer took the easy way out and announced there were spoilers and off she went.
Review #1
Personally, posting actual scenes from the book wouldn't be on my acceptable list of reviewing practices. But that's just me.

Review #2 This was original. This reviewer tackled the audio version. But what is it with posting excerpts from the story in the review? Is this a new trend?

Review #3 I liked this one.

Review #4 I didn't learn ANYTHING reading this review and it actually started with a spoiler. I can't believe that! A reader isn't supposed to find out WHO actually died until they read the book! I remember how I felt when I found out who it was during the course of reading and I wouldn't ever want that feeling diluted. It was powerful and this review casually dropped it la-ti-da. grrrrr

Review #5 This one was alright. Not a lot there but the reviewer respected the fact that spoilers would ruin it.
Like I said, this was a very hard book to review.

Review #6 Wow - um... this was brief. Did you learn anything about how the reviewer felt after reading the book. Yes, I got that she liked it - but exactly what floated her boat?

Review #7 I LIKED this review. I liked the reviewer's voice and her respect of the story and I liked what she shared. I was grinning as I read it. Yes. I liked this one.

Review #8 Okaaaay - I guess she was enthusiastic. I'm thinking the language was a bit- ::ahem::- let's just say, I try really hard not to use those expressions in my reviews. LOL. Did you learn anything from her review?

Review #9 It left a lot of loose ends? Did she even read the same book??? I'm not impressed with this review. What do you think?

Review #10 Um... language people. It's in the book, yes, but does it have to be IN the review? On the whole, the review was OK - and they did strive to take out spoilers which makes me think initially there were some. Like I said, the book was chock full of fun things.

Review #11
I'm not sure how to weigh in on this review. She's unhappy that's for sure. Would the review make you want to pick it up even though she does say some positive things in it???

Review #12 I can't comment on my own review but I'm throwing it in the ring as well. If you compare mine to the others, how'd I do?

I'll stop here. Believe it or not there are MORE reviews of this book out there. It's that popular. And from what I've seen, reviewers are varied. Some will respect the 'no spoilers' rule and others don't care. Some write the way they probably talk and some definitely march to a different drummer.

I realize this post is a huge undertaking. I'd love to find out which reviews you think are better than others and what makes them so? Which reviews do you think would turn off a reader? Why?

What did I learn? It reinforced what I don't like to see in reviews and I will attempt to avoid those practices in my own writing.

Another Opinion

Sometimes I look. Sometimes I don't.
And from both ways, I find things to share.

I did find a post that references writing reviews. I want to be fair and share whatever I find to help others. I'm posting this link because I think there is a valid point. That being said:

Enjoy a post on writing reviews by Adrienne Wilder

My reaction?
I don't know much about dogs or dog judging and I think I got a little lost in all of that but in a nutshell, I think she was trying to say that one of the things books should be rated on is their adherence to their genre. If a Regency has 21st century verbage or ideals, and because of the strict rules regarding writing in that period, the review's ratings are going to reflect that immediately.
I think that's what she said.
What do you think?