I recently became fb friends with many authors and several book reviewers. I always enjoy their status updates and what they share about books they are writing, reading or reviewing.
I have noticed that when I see someone write that they loved a book or wrote a rave review of a book or say they gave it 5 out of 5 stars, I want to check out the book. However, if they say they liked the book, but it wasn't as great as they hoped or only gave it a 3 out of 5, I don't even feel like reading the review.
Maybe it's just me.
I haven't had any reviews of my book and I'm hesitant to ask any of the reviewers (whose reviews I have read and appreciated) or anyone else to review mine. Is having a mediocre review worse than none at all?
I think it's possible that a mediocre review might be worse than a really bad one. At lease a bad one has a curiosity factor that might make some people at least want to take a look. I feel that half of the people that read "Fifty Shades of Gray" did so not because of the great reviews or even the reports that it was outrageously smutty, but because many people said it was SO badly written.
I admit to having read it for that last reason - to see if the writing was as terrible as I'd heard.
They say the worst response you can have to your work is indifference. It should evoke some kind of response in the reader, positive or negative, but I don't think that relates to reviews.
www.daylightsend.weebly.com
www.trustindarkness.weebly.com
No comments:
Post a Comment