What a Three Rating Means to Me

Poor Three.
Three is looked at askance.
Three carries a burden of shame.
Three is the loneliest number out there.

Why?

Because a rating of three tends to cause a myriad of emotions - none of them seem to be good.

Why is that?

I have no idea. Books that are rated a three can be quite entertaining. I call them many things: summer reads, a good time, a great way to pass an evening on a snowy or rainy evening.

For a book to be rated a three, there HAS to be some good qualities. I KNOW I've covered a Three Rating before. In fact, I wrote a post that had quite a few links within it pointing the way to those other posts. Here .. I'll make it easy. Go HERE for the back story on THREE.

In the post, Revisit Me, Screams Number Three, I was covering the writing of a review that screams HIGH SCORE, but the reviewer gives it a three rating. The words in the review did not match what the reviewer ultimately rated it and that's what that particular blog post was addressing. It's the links within that post that I want to draw your attention to.

I guess the question that should be asked then is, "HOW do I write a real three rated review?"

It's a very good question.
Some questions need to be answered not so much with words but with examples. Have I got a treat for you.

First, more words.
Just because a review of a book isn't rated high on a scale does not mean the review has no value. It does not mean that the book should be ignored. Far from it.

A well written three rated review is incredibly helpful to a future reader.

It translates to this: Yes, this book has issues. Yes, a reader is going to find some things that aren't smooth or perfect or logical.

But a well written three rated review is going to give you what makes it good. It will cover what makes it fun, interesting, entertaining, WORTH the time to read and worth checking out.

Why?

Because the story will grab you back; it CAN make you laugh, or gasp, or squirm with delight or ::facepalm:: from a bad or corny pun. That despite and in spite of all that might be wrong with the technical side of the book, the STORY is worth it.
The characters might be worth it.
The Romance might worth it.
The world building might be worth it.

The book might have SO much going for it that it seems a shame to rate it a three, but some things like: plot holes, overdone head hopping or changes of a hero's name within the book, all conspire to undermine what truly would have been a great book.

It ends up being, a GOOD book.

There is nothing wrong with a good book.

The following are links I invite you to check out.
Investigate why these reviews are considered solid examples of three rated books.

http://www.longandshortreviews.com/book-reviews/seeking-shelter-by-morgan-k-wyatt/

http://www.longandshortreviews.com/book-reviews/the-mortality-of-nathan-quinn-by-w-j-mccabe/

http://www.longandshortreviews.com/book-reviews/the-house-by-sebastiana-randone/

http://www.longandshortreviews.com/book-reviews/unexpectedly-you-by-lily-santana/

http://www.longandshortreviews.com/book-reviews/a-beautiful-disaster-by-willa-okati/

Here's a challenge for a reviewer. What happens when a book has even MORE things wrong with it that it is impossible to even reach a three rating. HOW in the world does a reviewer write a review without sounding snarky? Without insulting the author's baby? Or even, and this is a major no-no, insulting the author his/her self? Seriously? Some books with issues inspire people with no professional minded filters between brain and fingers to spout off in self-righteous indignation which in turn comes across as being mean and nasty. Can a review be written for even lower than a three and still be respectful, honest and informative yet positive?

Glad you asked that. YES. Yes, it can be done.

Voila. More examples.

http://www.longandshortreviews.com/book-reviews/my-three-dads-by-zane-silva/

http://www.longandshortreviews.com/book-reviews/haven-of-obedience-by-marina-anderson/

http://www.longandshortreviews.com/book-reviews/marked-by-grief-by-caitlin-ricci/

Now, since no reviewer is the same. I'm not going to say another word.

It's your turn.
After going through the examples, I would enjoy hearing your questions or comments. No one is going to find the same example as the one that "speaks" to someone else, but I hope one of them does. I'd like to hear which one you found helpful and why. It would be awesome if an actual formal "HOW-TO" format could be developed from this and I think feedback from you is key.

So, what do you say?
Do you now see why I say that a three rating is a good rating?
Because it is. Even if you end up going to the library and checking the book out. It's worth it.

How to Stay in the Race

The first thing a reviewer needs to do to reach the checkered flag at the end is make a good start at the beginning.  If we're talking horses, I'd say you have to shoot out of the starting gate as soon as it goes down.   If we're talking the Olympics at the sprinter's race, it is the sound of the starting pistol that gets everyone to move forward.  You can't stay in the race if you never get your best foot forward.  You can't stay in the race if there's no incentive to do so.  Your race = being read.

In all instances, an effective start puts a competitor in a better position to perhaps keep the lead and cross the finish line first.  That's the hope of every competitor.

The checkered flag in the end  = a reader who sticks around to read your entire review.

For a reviewer, their starting gate is the first paragraph. Their start signal is the first sentence.  I've covered this before but it's nice to have a reminder every now and again.  First, I'll give a link to the first time I touched base on this.

The Beginning of the Same Difference

The reason I believe it's good to visit this again is to remind reviewers that stating the obvious is boring.  Making it your first sentence is a buzz-kill.  Rehashing  - This is # such and such in the LaLa series and it's great - doesn't do a thing for me.  Not as a reviewer and certainly not as a reader.

Why should you avoid stating a book is whatever number it is in a series in your first sentence and paragraph? Because you'll lose a reader immediately.  The only ones that will keep reading your review is someone already a fan of the series. Readers unfamiliar with the series or the author and his/her works will say - "Oh, forget this.  I'll have no idea what's going on, so I'm not going to read anymore.  There are other books out there."

Right after identifying the number in the series, some reviewers will rehash the blurb - a major no-no and another boring addition.  Why?  Many review sites post the blurb first.  It's after reading the blurb that a reader will then continue onto the review.  Telling them what it's all about after they just read what it's all about is a waste of their time for reading, and a waste of a reviewer's time for writing. The only time giving a brief overview has value is when a review site does not include a book's blurb with the review and reviewers have to give a reader some insight.  For this post, I'm specifically addressing reviewing for sites that do provide the blurb up front. 

What you put in your first paragraph is key.  I like variety so, here are some examples to peruse for Bite Me, Your Grace by Brooklyn Ann.


Terrific, a wonderful bland of historical, romance and paranormal.

Of course, the typo in the first sentence doesn't inspire confidence much.*grin*

A fearless virgin and a reclusive duke sound interesting when paired together but throw in a vampire duke and a young woman determined to remain unmarried and willing to do anything to ensure she won’t, makes this book unique and fascinating.

The intro sentence compares the usual Regency fare to that same scenario with a twist, thereby teasing the reader to read more. Okay, so I wrote that particular review, but still, that is the result I was aiming for. How'd I do compared to the other examples? I enjoy feedback.

When I chose this book to review, I was intrigued by both the title and the premise. “Bite Me, Your Grace” as the title had me imagining a story using a clever double entendre. A clever title shows an author with a clever mind, right? In some ways the book was clever and there was evidence of that double entendre.

Even though I liked how it started and because I did, I read more - with this review (it's from a site that does not provide a blurb) I found the tone quite negative in the extreme even though it was well written.

Merging the humor of a Regency romp with the darkness of a vampire novel, Ann has come up with a charming debut that captures the light and dark of the era.

Although I liked this sentence, using an author's first name is unprofessional.  I covered this no-no in my post That Familiar Touch.

I included the above because they showcase how a good first sentence lures a reader to continue reading.

Next, I tried to find a book in a series, I chose, Lion's Heat by Lora Leigh:

This was another hot episode in the Breeds series. (ho-hum)

FULL of Spoilers!  Readers of this blog know how I feel about spoilers. 

Gives a wolf whistle and pumps fist in the air: She’s baaaaaaaaaaaaack! Oh Em Gee everyone, Ms. Leigh hit it out of the park with this long awaited story, Lion’s Heat.

I liked this because of the sheer enthusiasm of the reviewer.  Her comment about "died hard fans" had me laughing, which I'm sure was not her intent.  See?  Editing IS important!  And ::sigh:: spoilers again. What is it with spoilers in reviews??

This volume in Lora Leigh's Breeds series is a pretty good entrant -- unlike many of the other books in the series she published around the time of this one, it doesn't feel totally phoned in, maybe because the character of Jonas had received a lot of fleshing out in earlier volumes, or because of the build-up from the volumes.

Wow- nothing like bringing out the negative. Really makes me want to read the rest of the review. NOT!

Expectations can be too high sometimes. I was really looking forward to this book by Lora Leigh, Lion’s Heat. This is the 21st book in the breeds series and Jonas’s story which is a breed who has figured prominently in many of the breed stories to date.

Here we go, the # of the book, and negative to boot. I don't think this horse should have gotten out of the starting gate, do you? And, because I found two reviews back to back with prevalent negativity, it's the perfect segue for you to check out the The Sandwich Rule for Reviewing. There's a place for, and a way of, mentioning what didn't work for you in a review. It's worth referring to, believe me.

Director of the Bureau of Breed Affairs Lion Breed Jonas Wyatt knows the only person who could bring him to his knees is his assistant, Rachel Broen. -

I don't call this a review. It's a synopsis, pure and simple - and disappointing.  The first sentence starts as it went on.  In a race, it would have been disqualified. 

So, do you see what I mean? Initial presentation is important in writing a review. You want to be read, not passed over.

From an editing standpoint, many of these would have given an editor a headache due to content. Ouch.

Fish, Mice and Readers

What do fish, mice and readers have in common?

Bait.

For the first two, responding to bait isn't a good thing. For a reader, it can be a rewarding experience.
What do I refer to?
The first sentence or first couple of sentences in a review.

Why is that such a big deal?

That is where a reviewer has a chance to set the 'bait'.

Why would anyone want to entice a reader?

The purpose is to pique a reader's interest. ((Notice it's piqued and not peaked? That's a soap box for a different day ))

Ideally, bait gets a reader to read the rest of the review, to get interested in checking out the book further and in a perfect world, buy the book.

It's also called the 'Hook'. Yes, I've covered this topic in the past.  If you've not had the pleasure, sink your teeth into these past gems.

HERE
and
HERE

I'm pretty sure I covered it in depth but refreshers and reminders never go amiss.

The following are the first few sentences of a review which in my estimation are exactly the punch I'm talking about.

My fingers are still tingling from the erotic heat coming off this book. I was completely hooked after only a few pages and refused to stop reading until I had finished. This book had me captivated by its well written plot and titillating eroticism.

Review

In a hurry, but need a quick jolt of sensual excitement and seduction? Hop right into this very steamy tale because each command, every quivering sigh delivering a breathy ‘yes’, will jump start a reader’s pulse into overdrive. Once again Ms. Alex zeroes in on what a woman likes to read that seduces her mind and her senses.

Review

Proceed with caution when using Powertools, you just never know how hot they are going to get. Jayne Rylon’s fourth book in her Powertools series, Devon’s Pair, is smokin’ hot and exceptionally dirty!

Review

Life is never easy, especially when you are the nerdy heavy girl in love with the town hunk. Maxine’s love for Noah has nothing to do with his looks and more to do with the man he is when only she is around

Review

Garrett thought everything at home was just fine. He’d never been more wrong about anything in his life.

Review

Love is a light that keeps the darkness of evil at bay. However, memories of fear in a dark closet and echoes of the words—God does not listen to bad girl’s prayers—rules Adriane Darcy’s response to many things that happen.

Review

The preceding are examples that provide tantalizing information with words that make an impact in the first thirty seconds. Sometimes, that's all a reviewer has if they want to get their review read. Some readers will read it anyway because of the author or subject matter. But for readers who pop in just to check out reviews and to learn about new things they might want to try, those first few sentences that lead into that first paragraph are crucial.

Here's a comparison of the same book: Touch If You Dare by Stephanie Rowe

Reina is on a mission to save the life of her sister. She has failed to save her mother and seven other sisters, so she is determined to do whatever it takes. Unfortunately, saving Natalie’s life will involve killing and reaping souls. Reina works for Death, and he has offered her a promotion (with extra powers and tools) if she will kill the world’s most talented assassin.

Review

She’s working hard on trying to be a reaper for death. He’s trying to stay alive and not explode from the hate and anger he carries around in him. Ideal couple, don’t you think?

Review

The above two examples show the difference between a recitation versus an infusion of the reviewer's personal touch. The second offers a question which suggests a tone of cheek and sarcasm. When I read it the first time, the first thing I thought was "Oooh, a conflict of the sexes and that means trouble!" -- My reaction to the first example, was, "Okay - thanks for the info."

The next two comparisons I'm adding as a lark. Although the first line is a bit more grabbing, what follows is a bit of a downer. The second review's first line doesn't have any fire but the tone of the following review is much more optimistic and easier on the mind's stress level.

His Destiny by Diana Cosby

Secret keeping between the hero and heroine is always a problem when it comes to romance

Review

Traumatic experiences in childhood govern the psyche of both Emma Astyn and Sir Patrik Cleary MacGruder.

Review

The last comparison between two reviews is focused on the very first line. Granted, the site I'm linking to has a different format, so I'm not too sure what a search engine would pull up as a "first line". In this case, I scrolled down to where the actual meat of the review started.

The book in question is: Sex, Lies and Midnight by Tawny Weber

Sex, Lies, and Midnight is the second installment to Tawny Weber's Undercover Operatives series.

Review

I’ve been hoodwinked in the most delightful manner.

Review

Which of the last two has more originality in it? It's the clearest, shortest example of my point.

The first sentence isn't supposed to be facts that a reader can get off of the blurb or the publisher's site. Certainly it's not supposed to be a statement of where the book lands in a series. B.O.R.I.N.G. !!

It's supposed to be the reviewer's own words, expressing something that condenses a thought or feeling about the book.
Sizzle
Pop
Tingle
Hoodwinked
Proceed with caution

There are as many ways to grab attention as there are books to read. There is no official right way, but there are plenty of wrong ways. Putting a reader to sleep is a wrong way. Reiterating the outline of the story is too Dragnet - just the facts Ma'am.

This is about...
Character's name, is an orphan, a woman, a man, an alien, a slug
This takes place.....
This is the seventeenth adventure in a long line of adventures about a family with a lot of kids who get into a lot of trouble. ::sigh:
This is this, that is that.
zzzzzzzzzzz

Wake me up when you find a good one.

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.

Me, Myself & I - Three's a Crowd

What in the world does the post title have with reviewing?

Let me digress for a moment. George Orwell in 1946 wrote an eloquent treatise on the English Language

** ii) Never us a long word where a short one will do.

(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.**

I've included a link for you to enjoy at your leisure. What is there to enjoy? I found it humorous that he calls the word ROMANTIC a meaningless word. Not that I agree. lol

But, why have I included this link to Mr. Orwell's writing? Because of example #(iii).
Again, I ask you, "What is a review?"

The answer I'm looking for is, "An opinion."

Right.

So, when a reviewer is writing their review, sharing their opinion, would it stand to reason that the phrase, "In my opinion" is redundant? Isn't the whole review your opinion? Think about that.

The following may seem trivial and for many reviewers it's not even on their radar. It ties into the previous point.

A reader knows, for example, that Xeranthemum is writing the review and I'm writing my opinion about the book so anything included are my thoughts, viewpoints, rationalities, justifications, feelings and observations.

Why then would I use "When I as a reader ..." or "I myself..." ? I'm already writing as me, wouldn't the reader know that?

Can someone explain to me why using those terms might be acceptable? Is there another way to express them that wouldn't be redundant? Any suggestions?

The Beginning of the Same Difference

In talking with a good friend who's mega talented and creative, she asked me if I've ever scoped out other reviews of one book I've read and reviewed, and compared them to my own. Not one or two but many.

Can't say that I have but of course, instigator that she is, it got me to thinking.

I decided to investigate a book that I really liked. It's a series, it's paranormal and I don't think too many people know about her yet.

Silver Zombie by Carole Nelson Douglas. Ever read it?

So, first thing I did was to use my favorite search engine. The initial thing I noticed were the intro lines. Search engines can only post the first line or two of a review. I find that interesting. Why? Because that little window of opportunity is similar to an author's. They have to start their blurbs or even the first chapter with a hook, a unique sentence that grabs the reader. Needless to say, I sort of got mired in those one sentence attention grabbers. I'll compare reviews a different day. Today I thought it would be cool to share what an Internet query would show a potential book buyer.

Also, bear in mind that somewhere in my archives here I covered the intro to a review. Not only does a review not start with a synopsis but that first line should be fresh and unique and not some standard intro like 'Once upon a time...". We've outgrown that, haven't we?

This is what I found:

#1 - What do the Wizard of Oz, zombies and really cool bar drinks have in common? The answer is the heroine of Silver Zombie, Delilah Street, ...

#2 - Silver Zombie (Delilah Street #4). by Kelly Chandler (Goodreads). I think Carole has a winner with this series, the books are getting better as they ...

#3 - Silver Zombie is book four in Carole Nelson Douglas' Delilah Street series. It picks up where Vampire Sunrise ends; read the previous three

#4 - Silver Zombie started in Vegas then took a wild ride to Kansas- to Delilah's past. And wouldn't you know it her past and her present collide

#5 - Review of Silver Zombie. Delilah Street, Paranormal Investigator, #4 ... Silver Zombie is book Four in the Delilah Street Series

#6 - In Silver Zombie Delilah and Ric are headed back to Kansas to learn a little bit about why Delilah has some of her... hang-ups.

#7 - :In Silver Zombie, we learn more about the new abilities that Ric gained in ...

#8 - A little bit slow at the beginning but picked up when they reached Kansas. Read All Book Reviews of "Silver Zombie Delilah Street

#9 - Silver Zombie (Kindle Edition). This was a disappointing installment in what has previously been a pretty good series. ...

Okay readers and visitors - here are my questions for you.

WHICH one from the list would have you clicking the link to check out the rest of the review?

What do you think is the best? The worst?

My opinion? You know I have one. **GRIN**

I've come to the conclusion that starting off a review with the title and name of the author in that first line, especially one with a lot of words, robs the reviewer of a chance for their review to hook someone, anyone. Why? Because it leaves no room for anything clever or witty to show up in the search engine query.

I learned something here myself and will strive to adjust accordingly. If I feel the need to mention the book title and author name, I'll perhaps do it in the second line or even the beginning of the first paragraph in the meat of the review.

And this is the other thing I figured out. If a reader is surfing the Internet for a particular book or author, they already know that information. It's how they came to the link in the first place. It's redundant to say it all over again in the very first line. I want my review to be read, not hidden.

What do you think?

Spotlight

I look for reviews to teach.
Sometimes, I find reviews that I wished I had written because they are so well done and it's what I strive for.

I'm going to share a few that I think show and reinforce that there are good reviewers out there. We need more.

First, this is a review for Vowed in Shadows by Jessa Slade
I thought this review provided indepth insight and the reviewer was articulate.

The second:

Inasmuch as the first sentence was ... sort of passive, the rest of the review shared feelings without spoilers and it had an upbeat and positive spin. Maya Banks – Sweet Seduction


This review is short but it has opinion and it's upbeat and I liked the reviewer's voice. All I Ever Wanted by Kristan Higgins

So what do you think? I liked the positiveness and respect they showed. I liked that they weren't synopsis. The reviewer talked about things that were liked, sharing a personal touch on how the book's storyline and/or characters affected them. Opinions are wonderful things when expressed well.

Which review was your favorite?

The Rapunzel Effect

What does Rapunzel have in common with reviews?
Try letting it all hang down.
Rapunzel lets down her hair - as a big hairy dump or a sensual unrolling of locks.
Reviews...well they can take an author's hopes and either slam them down to the ground or have those same hopes sensitively addressed by a gentle waterfall of words that won't harm but inform.

What am I really referring to? Lower rated reviews of the 2-3 level and the words used to address and explain what put them there in the first place.

First let me say that for LASR/WC, a three rating isn't that bad of a rating. I have no idea why or how it got the bad rap in the first place. Books with a three rating have always been enjoyable and entertaining, they just don't make me dream about them at night, nor do they make me want to rush out and buy every and all books in an author's backlist. What a three rating has always done for me is to pass the time in an enjoyable and welcome manner. When glitches are found, and they always are, the story and/or characters were done well enough that it didn't matter, I still found merit in the story. I still am glad I read it. And I'm happy to say so.

A three rating also means that as a reviewer I have the responsibilty to explain what I felt held the story back. The most important component of meeting that responsibility is to respect the author and her/his work and be as factual, professional and courteous as you can be. There should not be any attacks on the author by making personal references that try to connect the faults in the story with perceived faults in the person. That's ludicrous and unacceptable behavior.

Please bear in mind that I refer to reviews on professional sites and not personal blogs. People's personal blog space can be anything they want it to be and that means anything goes - free speech.

That being said, I ask, "What do you think drags down a story?"

My first thought is editing. If it's a self-published book then it's the author's complete burden. If it's published with a big house or even a smaller e-pub that has editors, then the editors let the author down. But some editing is so bad that it sinks the story. If a reader feels disconnected more than involved because of the constant interruption, that would prevent a higher mark.

What are some specific things that would drag a story down? Depending on degree, there are:
* Too Stupid To Live (TSTL) Hero or Heroine
* Plot holes - makes no sense
* Too many coincidences - how convenient and pat
* Bad or lazy research - American Slang used by a British character that's never been to America and the book takes place in England
* Telling instead of showing
* Head hopping - too many (POV) point of view shifts in too short a space
* Narrative or passive story telling

Those are just a few. The trick to mentioning these types of things in a review is to couch them with positives especially if it's a three rating. Threes should have plenty of good things to say.

Like I mentioned - Showing is tons better than telling.

So, check out these links that are of reviews with "three" ratings. I believe these to be straightforward, succinct and address the issues of the story itself without going off on unprofessional tangents.

The Boy Next Door
Sunrise in a Garden of Love and Evil
Fallen
Act Like We're In Love
Hot Spanish Nights

Although the last one is a four rating, the review showcased again how issues prevent a good book from being even better.  So, as you can see, there are various ways to express things that didn't work for a reviewer.  Always remember to surround the negatives with positives and the review should always end on a upbeat note.
Any questions?

The Point Behind the Mouth

Have you noticed that I like to talk? I have a lot to say.

I've gone over what should be in a review, what authors are hoping to see and what readers need to see. Now it's time to take a look at the real thing.

This is an example of a short review with no information for a reader or author.

Click on title to see review: Learning How to Bend. First, I liked the opening line. It can grab a reader's interest if they like those kinds of stories. The second paragraph is synopsis. The third doesn't even qualify as a pargraph as it is only three sentences. Short sentences. Where does it give a reader or author the information of what worked or didn't to give it the 3.5 rating? Was it the dialogue? Why was the menage only fairly good? What the heck does that mean anyway? Was an arm in the wrong place? Not enough sex? Why is the book only rated as decent? Was it the descriptions? Motivation? What worked for the reviewer? What appealed to her about the characters and their relationship? If I wanted to decide to buy a book based upon the blurb, I would have done so. Why bother to look at this when I can't find out more than what the blurb would have initially given me? This is an example of a Missing Link.(Not sure what I'm referring to? Click the previous Missing Link and it'll take you to the post)

Phantom Corps #1/Federation Chronicles #3. (same thing, Click the title to see it)
No opening line on this review. Not a big issue but there are three rather large informational paragraphs that the reviewer took time to write. My issue? SYNOPSIS.(Need to see the post? click Synopsis) It's all about telling a reader what goes on in the book, not necessarily giving spoilers but it certainly is saying, "This is this and that is that" throughout the three paragraphs.

The final paragraph ends up being the actual review and of that the only line that jumped out at me was, "I felt it didn’t live up to the depth of emotion of the first two books" Okay, that is a valid observation and she's finally talking about how the book affected her. But if the author sees it, what is she going to get out of it? What exactly did the reviewer expect? What was missing? How can the author tweak it in the next book or her writing in general if the reviewer didn't give anyone an idea of what she expected and what didn't get delivered? As for the reader of the review .... what does that mean anyway? Are they shallow characters after all or will they still be able to connect with the H/H and care about what happens to them?

The kicker for me came when I scrolled down to the bottom of the page. They posted the BLURB and yet I still had to read all about it again? And this part in the review here, "Enter Daniel Haws, operative extraordinaire of the Phantom Corps, and unbeknownst to many, the man who commands it". The actual blurb 'hints' but the review reveals. Is that a spoiler????

My final example is this one: (definitely click this title to see what I'm gushing over) Verifiable Intelligence. This review started off with a good hook. I lost count after eight paragraphs and none of them involved reciting the blurb. There was information both the reader and the author can use, great examples of what worked and even what didn't. It backed up the rating it was given and it came across that the reviewer/reader really got into the book because the words flowed and the detail was intimate - meaning that could only happen if the reviewer actually read the book. I cannot fault this review at all but instead hold it up to the light for all to see. This is what I've been talking about and all the elements are here.

What more needs to be said?