Russell Kirkpatrick's Journal
Viewing By Entry / Main
Reviews
28-Jan-2007
What's the best kind of review a writer can get? Answer: one where the reviewer takes the book seriously.
There are very few of these. Most reviewers use your book to make a point about the genre, or about the history of fantasy, or about how your book compares to some other book. A few dunderheads write reviews solely for the purpose of showing how clever they are. These generally trash anything that smells of popularity, and champion obscure work to prove how intelligent and discerning they are.
But sonetimes a reviewer actually engages with your work. I don't care whether the reviewer likes the book or not, as long as she understands what I'm trying to do.
The very best review tells the reader what sort of book it is, what it offers, who might enjoy it, and what its shortcomings are.
What do you want in a review?
Comments
I have been reading your blog for a while now, but haven't wanted to comment as it feels a little like interrupting a private conversation (a definate element of voyeurism in these blogs). Purely from a reader's point of view, I couldn't agree more about the reviews - it is such a rare occasion when you find a review that actually talks about the book rather than pushing the critic's own agenda. It is very frustrating to read a review of a book I've read and realise that the critic just doesn't have a clue. The same goes for movies, I recently read a review of "Happy Feet" where the movie was criticised because penguins don't REALLY sing, and because the critic was sceptical about whether penguin feet would REALLY tap on ice...??? Some people can get a little bit carried away with themselves, can't they? Apologies for the length, I got a little carried away myself!
Hi Joanna, yes, blogs are odd, aren't they. Don't worry about joining in on the conversation, and don't mind Gillian and Linda, they can't help being the ay they are ;)
Your points are well made. If only critics would realise what a disservice they do when they fail to give us a clear indication of who would like/not like something and why.
Your points are well made. If only critics would realise what a disservice they do when they fail to give us a clear indication of who would like/not like something and why.
What I want in reviews is for someone else to write them :). That's just today. Tomorrow I will be pickier.
Joanna, don't feel you have to be polite to Russell. It's his blog, true, but look what he just said about myself and Linda!
Joanna, don't feel you have to be polite to Russell. It's his blog, true, but look what he just said about myself and Linda!
Gillian, a cruel person might say that what you want in a review is exactly what we want ;)
It's a shame I told you a couple of months back that I was retiring from reviewing soon. It would have been *so* effective to tell you now.
Thanks for the warm welcome, folks. May I say, to use a food metaphor 'cos I'm really hungry right now, that the interaction between the three of you is the spice added to the already excellent stew that is Russell's blog. (I'm new, I have to be nice to everybody!!) :)
I have given up on book reviews because I don't believe anyone can give an unbiased opinion. I have read rave reviews for a book and had been thoroughly disappointed after reading the book and vice-versa.
I usually read the synopsis on the back cover and if that sparks my interest then I usually buy it - as I did with Husk.
I usually read the synopsis on the back cover and if that sparks my interest then I usually buy it - as I did with Husk.
Plus there's always the picture on the front, 'cos they're always sooo informative...?!? I have been finding a lot of new authors to read by looking at the recommendations of authors whose books (or blogs) I have already read. Russell, your blog led me to your books, not the other way around...and it was Jenny Fallon's blog that led me to you! Who needs those silly opinionated newspaper critics anyway (thinking here of writers for "The Weekend Australian" rather than any present company, of course). OK, that's 3 posts on one topic, I promise to not always be so prolific (chatty??).
I think you're spot on with this post, Russ. Which means I'll have to go have a lie down, because we agreed on something!! *g*
I don't much care for reviewers who are only interested in the sound of their own voices. I like the kind of reviews you like, and have been lucky enough to get some!
I don't much care for reviewers who are only interested in the sound of their own voices. I like the kind of reviews you like, and have been lucky enough to get some!
Book reviews are like movie reviews.....it is just an opinion. Why some reviewers need to trash novels and on a more personal note..authors, is beyond me. I always make my own mind up as we are all different and have different likes and dislikes on subject matter/genre. Like you Joanna, I often go on another authors recommendation on the cover, but when i read a review I like to be told a bit about the plot, setting, writing style and the author. All these things help me make a judgement as to whether I want to try a new author......and to save you all a lot of reading of Russells new book....start at page 400 you can't do wrong :-)
GdJBOQ <a href="http://xodyoewyckcp.com/">xodyoewyckcp</a>, [url=http://eqaojsclncar.com/]eqaojsclncar[/url], [link=http://auynxvzhwdev.com/]auynxvzhwdev[/link], http://ausdtdfyorir.com/
Hkcsbc <a href="http://cbcfoosgymba.com/">cbcfoosgymba</a>, [url=http://njstkshzspvf.com/]njstkshzspvf[/url], [link=http://jwcivkhinqlf.com/]jwcivkhinqlf[/link], http://hsqqqronzkxd.com/