I don't think I've ever written a review (at least not of a fiction book) - not an actual, deliberate review. I have made comments and blogged about some novels and non-fiction and books about writing.
I've been reading some book reviews lately and I think they must be hard to write and really hard to write well. Not that the ones I have read aren't good, but I think it must take some practice and development of a system for rating.
One of the hardest things might be describing/summarising the story. I know how hard it is for an author to briefly describe their own book and make it sound interesting. Is it harder or easier to do that as a reader - or does it depend on the book?
I know from critiquing (and from teaching horseback riding) that I'm pretty good at being positive while making note of things that need to be or could be improved. I wonder if I could be honest about a book I really didn't like? I could choose to write reviews only of books that I did like.
Is it more worthwhile to share with other readers books they would like - rather than books they should avoid? I don't think it's necessary to draw peoples attention to a book they might not enjoy, but it's always nice to recommend good ones.
It sort of follows the adage about not saying anything if you can't say something nice and that makes sense to me.
www.daylightsend.weebly.com
www.trustindarkness.weebly.com
No comments:
Post a Comment