How to Write Lower-Rated Reviews

Please welcome my fellow reviewer, Astilbe.

Though a skilled reviewer of books in all ratings, she has honed writing reviews of lower rated books into an art form. When asked how she did it so well and so consistently, and if she could share her insights with other reviewers, she responded with writing this post. I'm very grateful and honored to share this with you, with permission.

How to Write Lower-Rated Reviews

When I use the phrase “lower-rated reviews,” I’m talking about the books that land in the 2.5 to 3.5 star rating range.

Aside from technical criticisms about the use of inconsistent tenses or grammatical errors, writing reviews is a highly subjective experience. You and I could read the same story and come away with very different opinions of it based on just about anything: pet peeves, whether or not this is a genre you regularly read, your expertise on something the author might not know as much about, etc., etc. It’s important to keep this in mind as you’re writing because there’s no way to know if the people who read your review share your point of view. What I consider to be an overused trope in, say, the mystery genre might be something that you think is vital for a truly satisfying ending. (And vice versa!)

There are definitely still things to like about stories that earn lower ratings: descriptive settings, interesting characters, strong pacing, unique plot twists, etc. The list is endless, but these tend to be the types of potential compliments I look for first when I’m figuring out what to say about them. Feel free to pick out anything you enjoyed about it, though, as long as it’s an honest compliment.

I always jot down my impressions about a tale as I’m reading it. It’s especially easy to overlook the good stuff when you’re in the middle of something you don’t immediately love, so these phrases or very short sentences jog my memory later on when I’m writing the review.

Of course, there will also be issues that you as the reviewer feel compelled to bring up. This is where the sandwich rule comes in. (Link to Sandwich Rule)  Here is the basic template I use for my reviews:

INTRODUCTION

POSITIVE FEEDBACK

NEGATIVE FEEDBACK

POSITIVE FEEDBACK

CONCLUSION

If I have a lot to say, I’ll repeat the positive and negative feedback as often as is necessary, but I always end with something positive.

Every one of us has strengths and weaknesses, and constructive criticism is much easier to swallow if you’re also told what you’re doing right. Helping authors get better at their craft is a huge part of why we write reviews after all!

On the very rare occasion that I can’t find enough positive things to say about a book, I’ll return it. About half of the time another reviewer has later requested those stories. It made me happy to see that someone else enjoyed them, and it’s never a good idea to force the issue if you truly don’t like a particular novel.

As an author I know how hard it is to hear that someone didn’t like your work. One of the reasons why I decided to volunteer at LASR is that I loved their strict “No Snark!” policy. Consider these two (completely hypothetical) criticisms: “This story sucks! How can something that’s only 60 pages long be so slow? And who the heck is Darren, again? What a waste of time.”

and

“The pacing was uneven from beginning to end. While I understand the author’s urge to include so much backstory in the first two chapters, it would have been helpful to jump into the action sooner given that this is a short story instead of a full-length novel. Anna’s blossoming relationship with Darren was fascinating, and I think that exploring that further while they were on the run would have provided more than enough clues about why she was so eager to protect him despite the horrible danger they were in. It also would have given the author more time to explain the ending in better detail.”

The first criticism is basically just a rant. We know the reviewer didn’t like this story, but we don’t know anything specific about why they feel that way. As a potential new fan, I wouldn’t put much stock into this review because it’s so vague and negative. It could have been written about just about any romantic mystery out there, and that doesn’t make it helpful for me while I’m deciding whether or not to find out what happens to these particular characters.

The second criticism explains why the reviewer felt this way in detail without cursing or insulting all of the author’s hard work. If the author writes a sequel to Anna and Darren’s adventures, he or she will know that this reviewer loved seeing these characters get to know each other but wishes the exciting stuff had started a few chapters sooner. This is specific information that can be used to make real adjustments in how he or she writes future stories.

(Or maybe the author will decide that they like this hypothetical series just the way it is! But at least now they know WHY their book only earned 2.5 stars in this particular review).

This brings me to the other reason why we write reviews: to help readers find great new books! As I mentioned earlier, there’s no possible way for me to know ahead of time if my audience will agree with my perspective.

Luckily, precognition isn’t a requirement for putting together a good review.

While I definitely keep the author in mind while I'm writing, I also think of the review as a conversation with a friend who wants to know what I’ve been reading. If he or she asked me what I really thought of book X, I’d be completely honest with him or her.

If I really loved Anna’s character development, I’m going to gush about it. This is something that’s extremely important to me when I’m deciding what to read next, so when I find a great protagonist I’ll tell everyone about him or her.

If the ending made me say, “Huh?” I’ll bring it up diplomatically (without giving away spoilers, of course). They might not agree with my dismay, but at least they’ll know ahead of time that the last 10% of the plot wasn’t as fun for me as the first 90%.

My final piece of advice might sound kind of silly at first, but it really helps me figure out where to go next when I’m stuck.

Read what you have so far out loud.

Pause for a moment.

What’s missing?

What would you say next if you were talking about this story instead of writing about it?

This isn’t a foolproof trick, of course, but it has helped me figure out where to go next by getting my mind back into the tone of the story I’m thinking about. A lighthearted romance is going to require a completely different mindset than would a post-apocalyptic zombie thriller or a hard-boiled mystery, after all.

Happy reviewing!

When is Great the Best?

A couple of posts back, in "What a Three Rating Means to Me", one of my commenters suggested a post. I've since had someone second that request. Cool!

It was a very good observation. What is the real difference between great and The Best?

Merriam Webster has the dictionary explanation for GREAT: #3: remarkable in magnitude, degree, or effectiveness or #4: full of emotion or #10a: remarkably skilled or #10b: marked by enthusiasm : keen and of course #11: used as a generalized term of approval

Then there is the definition of BEST: better than all others in quality or value, excelling all others

For reviewing purposes, I'll use LASR's explanation of great and best when it comes to books:

5 Stars — Great! You would definitely buy this book. You would definitely recommend it to your friends. You really loved the characters and the plot and would consider looking for this authors back list or making her an autobuy. The writing and editing were superb.

A LASR Best Book - For a book or story that is truly exceptional. You think about it when you're not reading it. You wonder what happens to the characters when you finish. You would absolutely buy everything else this author had to offer. The highest praise - and reserved for only a few.

The first thing I need to remind readers is that a review is an opinion. One person's Best Book is another's Great. There are technical issues that can be rated objectively, like punctuation, spelling/grammar and consistency in tenses, and narrative/telling verses showing. But how a book makes a person feel is purely subjective. That is where things can become a sticky wicket.

Both categories share the buying of the book, recommendations to friends, excellent editing and the consideration of making the author an auto-buy and/or getting all the books on the author's backlist.

For the great rating a reader will connect and be thrilled with the characters. No two ways around it.

For the BEST rating a reader will also connect and be thrilled but that 'liking' takes a step further. There's a certain level that the author's characters have reached inside a reader that a great book simply does not do.

Extreme examples are fans of Sherrilyn Kenyon. Her characters have struck a chord to the point that fans have named their children after them. Readers and fans have had tattoos applied on various parts of their bodies of the symbols that are found in, and related to, the books.

Just stop for a moment and think about that.

The power of one book to, even for just for a moment, make you want to do something tangible to show the world how deeply you were affected. Create fan fiction, do graphic art, anything to live with the characters for that little while longer are all examples of how some people express what a BEST Book can inspire them to do. Even if a reader does none of those things in real life, the feeling that is created after reading such a book is profound.

A GREAT book can make you feel good, but it's fleeting. You write your review, you've spread the word, checked out other books by the author and you continue on. The book is great, yes, but it doesn't turn into a pleasant brain worm on your psyche. It doesn't have the staying power of a Best book.

A BEST book won't be fleeting. Let me give you an example.

Years ago I read and reviewed The Madness of Lord Ian MacKenzie by Jennifer Ashley. It has to be three years ago since I've read it and I still am affected. Whenever I read one of the later MacKenzie family stories and Ian's in it, I am thrown back to that first book, his story, and how profoundly it affected me. How it continues to affect me. I won't go and tattoo Ian's name on my body anywhere, but I certainly have bought every book in the series. They are on my keeper shelf.

I recently read the MacKenzie family Christmas story Ms. Ashley wrote and lo! Ian was there playing a very significant role in delivering the meaning of Christmas to his family. I fell in love with him all over again. I simply cannot put into words how I feel. The FEELING I get. It's indescribable. I get lost in his eyes whenever he graces me with full on eye contact. If you've read the book, you know how special, how intense that can be.

Another way to explain what a Best Book is like is comparing a movie.

Let's use the 2007 movie, Titanic. Scores of people say it's a great movie. And it probably is. A great movie. The scene with Kate Winslet on the bow of the ship is memorable. But how far does that movie weave its effect on the populace?

Now, think about The Princess Bride. Hey! Don't laugh. Seriously, think about it.

How many quotable lines do you hear repeated? A few days ago I read a paranormal romance where the hero replies to the heroine, "As you wish". The heroine didn't get it because she never saw the movie but the secondary characters did and they snickered and rolled their eyes. And yes, I laughed too. I got the joke. How many people do you know can say, "My name is Inigo Montoya..." How many people do you know that can apply "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." in an every day conversation, and then laugh like a loon. The movie, its quotes and characters follow you.

That is what a Best Book rating is like. A book that follows you. And that is why LASR's criteria adds the line "- and reserved for only a few." There are many books that are great. Completely great. But only a few weave their way into your life, your heart, your vocabulary and your passion. Lord Ian MacKenzie's story was my Best Book.

What's yours?

Everyone's a Critic, Right?

That's right; everyone has an opinion about something.
Some folks criticize to correct someone and challenges them to help them grow.
Some folks criticize to demean and destroy.  Cue: Snark

But, there is a flip side to criticism - both good and bad.

But what IS criticism?

For reviewing purposes, I chose this explanation: The analysis or evaluation of a work of art, literature, etc.

That's a basic definition and it applies to reviewing. It's the part that takes a story to task for failing a reader at certain points. I admit, it can be incredibly hard to be a constructive critic. Human nature has a tendency to go overboard sometimes.

But the hardest part about being a critic and exercising critical thinking is when a reviewer is conflicted.

What puts a reviewer in such a position? To feel torn, or obligated? When they are asked to crit a friend's work - doesn't matter if it's about a book, a screenplay or a poem.

When a person is emotionally vested in a relationship, whether personal or professional, the ability of a person to be objectively critical is compromised and feelings oftentimes are in the driver's seat.

If you are asked to review a friend's book, do you? As a rule, the answer should be no. I'm not talking about a situation where you really don't want to read and review their book, but when you do want to. And along with that wanting to read their story and offer up your opinions, you run the risk of getting on your own emotional roller coaster - and it's not a pleasant ride.

Guilt will plague you.
Worry will haunt you.
Second guessing yourself will torment you.

Are you being too harsh? Will whatever you point out as 'wrong' hurt your friend's feelings? How accurate can your crit be if you are constantly trying to couch your suggestions so as to not hurt someone, or worse, make them angry? How fair are you being? No wait, are you being unfair? I think you can get an idea as to where this is going.

I guess a lot depends on the kind of relationship you have with the person whose work you are critting. If you are lucky, there's an established trust where the author has a thick skin and understands the vein in which the crits are presented thereby allowing you to honestly share how the book really affected you - the good, the bad, and the hilarious.

But, I believe one of the worst case scenarios is of a reviewer taking on a book to review for someone, and by virtue of feelings of obligation, duty, friendship or hero-worship, gives a glowing, gushing high-five write-up that whitewashes the whole book into a shining example of perfection, when it's possibly anything but.

That does an author a huge disservice.

I repeat, giving a carte blanche glowing review no matter what does not benefit the author in any way, except perhaps, ego. But that's ephemeral at best.

Another point about that practice, and let me be clear, is that it hurts a reviewer's credibility. The damage doesn't necessarily stop there either. If you review for a professional review site, it could compromise their reputation. If you give a book a top rating whereas all the other ones are much less, it calls into question the veracity of the review, and by association, the review site as a whole.
Now, before you jump all over that last sentence and remind me about reviews being opinions, let me explore that difference.

If a book is riddled with errors and blatant plot holes and objective points of criticism that would always and everywhere lower a rating in a review and THAT book still gets a glowing gushy top rating from you with absolutely no acknowledgement of the well known issues that have come to light in other reviews, then it stands out like Jeff Foxworthy at a mime convention.

Another compromising position for a reviewer is one who is a diehard, devout fan of an author or series.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with following a series. Nothing at all. If, and that's a big IF, the reviewer can step back from his or her fandom and view the book objectively. That means being willing and able to point out any inconsistencies or plot issues like they would have for any other book and not only mention them, but rate it accordingly.

As long as a reviewer can do that, then review away. Because let's face it. There is no way an author can consistently have top ratings or best book ratings for every single book in a fifteen book series without at least once or twice dropping the ball and falling through a plot hole, get confused on a head hop or create a character so flat, they don't even warrant the title of pancake. Authors are human too.
The bottom line?

Review with honesty.
Review with a pragmatic approach.
Review without guilt or pressure or perceived expectations.
Be willing to give constructive criticism.
Be willing to say no.

And if you can't say 'no', or are totally crushing on wanting to read that story, then do yourself and the author a favor.

Rate the book on how it really is, and NOT on how you think they'd want you to rate it.

All authors want to hear their baby is great. It's human nature. But as kids need braces to fix oral misalignment, so too do authors need to hear what doesn't work, so they can correct it and write a better scene the next time.

Yes, everyone can try be a critic. But not everyone knows how to, or when not to. And that's the difference.

Reviewing Isn't Singing Along with Toby Keith

I actually enjoy Talk About Me and it's great to sing along with - if I can keep up. 

The lyrics that stick with me are these:

"I like talking about you you you you, usually, but occasionally
I wanna talk about me (me,me,me,me- background singers)
I wanna talk about meeeeeeee (me,me- background singers)
(I wanna talk about me- background singers)mmmm me me me me
(I wanna talk about me- background singers)mmmm me me me me
You you you you you you you you you you you you you

I wanna talk about ME!"

What does Toby Keith's song have to do with reviewing? It is perfect to illustrate what readers should see in a review.   If I'm writing the review, you want to know what I felt, what I saw, how I was affected, what I liked, what I didn't, what I observed and what I looked for and what I found and what I didn't find.  Did I laugh, did I cry, did I faint from the scorching love scenes or fall asleep or did I want to rush out and tell everyone to read this book; all those things are points that make a review valuable to a potential buyer of a book.  What do they have in common? Me!  My opinion.

What I do not want to see is you: You will like this..., You will absolutely love..., You will cry when ..., You will want to ...., You will come to believe..., You must..., You are going to .... You you you you you.

Seriously, how can a reviewer possibly anticipate a reader reacting the same as the reviewer?

There are times when "You" can be fine to use.

"You might remember the old adage, "It takes a thief to catch a thief".

 At that point the reviewer is talking to the reader, drawing them in by using a common analogy or reference to make their point.   Nowhere in the above example is the reviewer telling the reader what they will do.  It's being chatty, and that's fine.  But when reviewers persist in talking...no telling the reader how to do this or that, then it ceases being a sharing of opinion and comes across as shaking a figurative finger at the reader with authority, "You will laugh...!" "You will do this...after reading this scene, chapter, book."

I don't think so.

To flip Mr. Keith's lyrics around from "I like talking about you you you you, usually, but occasionally
I wanna talk about me."

 It should be "I like talking about me me me me me, usually, but occasionally I can talk about you."

It's hard to refrain from You-ing all over the place.  A reviewer might do it because they feel that they're writing it in a way  that might relate better to the reader.  It's not. It's telling.  A review is your opinion and you are sharing about how the book, characters, dialogue, setting or sex scenes affected you.  Or not.

I need to see,  "I was amazed!"  not, "You will be amazed."  You can't possibly know that.

When I see a review telling me to do this or that,  I get all huffy and want to stomp up to my soap box  and hold up a neon sign that says STOP!  I don't like to see someone telling me how I'm going to react to the same book they're talking about. That's for me to decide.  I can only hope that I'll derive the same sense of enjoyment, awe, surprise or excitement out of the book as the reviewer.  But I can't be told to.

A reviewer's goal is to Make me want to experience those same things by hooking me, intriguing me, teasing me and painting with words that show me their enthusiasm and observations enough that it piques my interest, whets my appetite and encourages me to go and read the book for myself.  

Me.

Before you submit your review, look it over to see if you are sharing your opinion or telling.

Too much telling in a book can drag down the review rating.  Telling in a review is just as unwelcome.

Please be aware folks. And when writing, think in your head, 'talk about me'.

"Revisit Me" Screams Number Three

Hello, again, fellow reviewers!
Welcome, fellow word grazers!

It's been awhile, hasn't it?  I've covered many aspects of reviewing so topics are fewer to come by.  Sometimes what is old is new again and this post proves it.  I heard it through the editing grapevine that ratings aren't equaling the review.  The ripple effect from that practice is not pretty and it affects the reviewer's credibility, not to mention causes untold confusion for the author as well as readers of your review.

The rating of three (3) isn't a bad thing.  If you need a refresher about a  three (3) rating click HERE -- remember the Rapunzel-effect?.  I know some of you do.  I even covered a three (3) rating in more depth HERE  -  personally, I think the 'Missing Link' is even more helpful.  Three(3) is a popular subject, can you tell?

The flip side of rating a book a three (3), is not writing the review to justify it.  In fact, what is being written is glowing, gushing and all perfectly positive.  If you're that enthusiastic about the book, why in the world are you rating it a three (3)?  To paraphrase Mr. Spock, "That does not compute."  Certainly, it's not logical.

For a book to earn a three (3) rating, it has to have faults. Has to. Not maybe. Has to. And how to address them was covered in The Rapunzel Effect - so go check out that link if you haven't already.

A reviewer does a great disservice to the book and all readers of their review when there is tons of gushing and positive opinions without sharing what dragged it down from a perfect rating of five (5) or Best Book to a three (3).  There has to be a reason.  It's the responsibility of a reviewer to express that; share what didn't work and what could have made it better in a concise but respectful manner.  Remember, no snark - it's never constructive nor truly informative.  Remember, I covered No Snark when I went 'fishing'.  Need a refresher?  Click HERE

I'm not sure why a reviewer would hesitate to share their opinion of what didn't work for them. I don't think they'd hold back if they were talking to their friends face to face about it.  I hardly think they'd recommend a book to their friends by waxing poetic about how great it was and then mislead them by not warning them of the book's pitfalls.  Friendship means taking the good with the not-so-good.  The relationship that a reviewer has with her/his audience is just like a friendship.  Some readers follow a reviewer because they feel that they can trust the opinion of the writer.  Why would you want to let them down?  What are you afraid of?  Are you aware that authors respect a well worded critique and find the information of what didn't work, helpful?  They do.  Well, most do.

 If a reviewer stated that the hero's dialogue came across sounding like a stubborn, childish cur instead of a man you could respect and swoon over, then they'd know to pay more attention to the male POV and how he's depicted.  Perhaps they need to do more research on how men talk amongst themselves to gain more insight.  And that insight may very well benefit the next hero, and reviewers will truly have reason to be enthusiastic. Maybe there was a ton of confusing head hopping in a book and the reviewer shared that it was overdone and threw them out of the story.  That might challenge the author to rein in his/her characters and the next book will be sharp and on target.

The bottom line?  Write a review that matches the rating.  Give details ( NOT SPOILERS) about what was missing, or what didn't work.  Something.  Don't just say  the book 'feels' like a three (3).  That means nothing.  Please do not submit a review that has "Happy, Happy, Joy! Joy!" (nod to Ren & Stimpy) all over it and then slap on a three (3) rating, or even a four (4).  When you do that, your credibility is on the line.

Please make your reviews match and/or justify your rating.

Play the Match Game

Remember Match Game back in the 1970s? Ah, that Gene Rayburn was a kick.
And I just dated myself. LOL

However, it's not a game that I'm referring to with that post title. Nor is it very humorous. In my archives, I did a post called The Rapunzel Effect. One of the comments inspired a reply from me that truly created a spark of emotion.

I was talking about reviews rated a three on the LASR or Whipped Cream review sites. That rating isn't necessarily a bad thing at all. It's what I term a summer read: something fun, it helps to pass the time in an enjoyable manner. Sometimes a reader doesn't want a heavy hitter, just an infusion of romance. Short stories do that but they also tend to see more three ratings than not.

Why do I think 3 has a bad rap? Easy - it's because of how the review is written. The Rapunzel Effect addresses that so I'm not going to repeat myself.

What I am trying to point out is this: The rating has to match the review.

A review simply cannot have the words: excellent, perfect, great, in the conclusion of the review where previously, the writer was blasting negatives throughout. The review will not be taken seriously--especially if the reviewer decided to give a four or better rating.
The reader is going to come away scratching their head, "I thought the reviewer hated the book.(?)"

Here's a review of one of my favorite stories. It's a four book rating but the writer mentions something that justifies it being a four. I also think if it hadn't been included, I would have expected a higher rating, but that could be my personal prejudice.
GOING OVERBOARD

A reviewer cannot give a gushing and glowing report and use those same positive words yet give a three rating. That makes no sense! There has be something that prevented it from getting a higher score. The reviewer has to say so. Has to. Otherwise, how can a reader trust the rating?
Here's an example: DON'T FENCE ME IN

Don't even get me started on how the review doesn't even give a potential reader any insight. That's a different post. But, see what I mean?
She claimed it was 'well researched' and 'solid'. So, why didn't it rate higher?

A better example of a three rating is this: BEHIND THE BENCH

Sure, something wasn't quite perfect for her, but the fact that the reviewer enjoyed the reading experience was not lost on me.

Now in this example, the reviewer hated the book. The tone of the review and the rating totally matched. I don't advocate this type of harsh and in depth microscopic carnage but the writer certainly was eloquent in her distaste. LOVE IN THE TIME OF DRAGONS.

By the same token, whenever a reviewer gives a reason for a three book or cherry, they need to do it with respect and civility. Reviews are not supposed to make an author bleed.

If authors are seeing a lot of negative and scathing comments regarding their work, and the majority of those are rated threes, it's not a wonder that poor little number 3 has had a bad rep. It's not fair. It's a generic paint brush tactic that is tarnishing everything.

A three rating can be a good thing, TEXT ME
- when the review is written right. Need a Refresher? REVIEWS CLASS #2

Make the rating match the review. Make sense. And play nice.