If a book I've committed myself to review turns out to be 'disappointing' I make an effort to present it objectively to the reader, including a good number of excerpts from the text, so that the reader might form his or her own opinion independent of my own.
— Joyce Carol Oates
"Prolonged, indiscriminate reviewing of books is a quite exceptionally thankless, irritating and exhausting job. It not only involves praising trash but constantly inventing reactions towards books about which one has no spontaneous feeling whatever."
— George Orwell
The only reason I reproduced the quotes by Joyce Carol Oates and George Orwell was because they were well said.
Actually, I have been thinking about book reviews, my own and those by fellow bloggers, and—I'm sticking my neck out here—I think a majority of reviewers hate panning books. Instead, they are content with offering mild criticism of a book they didn't like much, for whatever reason.
I don't pan books either. In fact, I find myself saying only good things about the books I review on this blog. The thing is I am not conscious of it. I realise that I could have pointed out certain flaws only after I have read a book and reviewed it.
People say writers have a responsibility towards their readers because they invest their time, money, and expectations in the book. So if a particular book doesn't live up to one's expectation or the hype, it should be trashed, particularly if the author is one of your favourites. I don't agree. I read books, especially fiction, because I enjoy reading and as a form of self-gratifying entertainment and I treat them as such, and along the way I learn something. I also have a theory that every book, no matter how bad it may be, has redeeming qualities which is still no reason to pan it.
This debate is older than the first book you read. Still, what do you think?
— Joyce Carol Oates
"Prolonged, indiscriminate reviewing of books is a quite exceptionally thankless, irritating and exhausting job. It not only involves praising trash but constantly inventing reactions towards books about which one has no spontaneous feeling whatever."
— George Orwell
The only reason I reproduced the quotes by Joyce Carol Oates and George Orwell was because they were well said.
Actually, I have been thinking about book reviews, my own and those by fellow bloggers, and—I'm sticking my neck out here—I think a majority of reviewers hate panning books. Instead, they are content with offering mild criticism of a book they didn't like much, for whatever reason.
I don't pan books either. In fact, I find myself saying only good things about the books I review on this blog. The thing is I am not conscious of it. I realise that I could have pointed out certain flaws only after I have read a book and reviewed it.
People say writers have a responsibility towards their readers because they invest their time, money, and expectations in the book. So if a particular book doesn't live up to one's expectation or the hype, it should be trashed, particularly if the author is one of your favourites. I don't agree. I read books, especially fiction, because I enjoy reading and as a form of self-gratifying entertainment and I treat them as such, and along the way I learn something. I also have a theory that every book, no matter how bad it may be, has redeeming qualities which is still no reason to pan it.
This debate is older than the first book you read. Still, what do you think?
.jpg)
0 Yorumlar