Who should you be
reviewing for? Readers, authors, publishing houses? If you are going
to start reviewing on a blog or website then you will need to decide
who it is exactly that you are reviewing for. You can not review for
them all and you will have to choose your angle carefully if you do.
I sometimes get told
(by Indie authors only at this stage as they rely heavily on the promotional power of the positive review) that
reviewers should only be writing positive reviews and
that if a reviewer has not liked a book and has negative feedback to
give, then they should not write a review at all.
But why would I do
that? Why would any reader want to do that? I am reviewing books for
my fellow readers and fellow readers do not want a one sided opinion
on a book. They want your truth. A warts and all evaluation.
To a reader, negative
feedback in a review is as important as positive feedback. To an
author or a publisher, positive feedback is the most important,
because positive reviews sell books and create buzz (small or big,
buzz does sell books too).
A reviewer who is
reviewing for other readers, should not be interested in selling
books for people, even if they are friendly acquaintances or friends.
If the book is any good, it will sell itself and it will build a
steady supply of positive reviews on its own. Leaving biased over
positive reviews of books because the author is a friend will only
out you as a dishonest reviewer when people discover your
opinion can not be relied upon.
A book review blogger
needs to build an honest relationship with their followers and
readers. If week in week out you are consistent and truthful, then
over time people will begin to trust you. Or in the very least,
understand you. They may not agree with you on a book, but they know
your opinions cannot be bought. They come to understand your taste and
can base their own decisions, on what to read, off of your opinions.
It is a mutually beneficial relationship.
You rely on others to read
your blog to make the time you put into blogging worthwhile. The
follower relies on you over time to help them find new books. In the
process, the follower will also learn a lot about themselves as a reader. You
will have helped them understand their own tastes, likes and
dislikes.
You may not know you
are building a rapport with your viewers because they sit out there
in silence. The only hint that they are there is the growing number
of 'site visits' on your visitation counter or the 'followers' number
you can see in your site stats (although the majority of your
followers are going to follow you by email and will never show up in
that follower count).
You can only build this
rapport with fellow readers if you stay true to yourself. This may
mean irritating some authors or publicists who may have given you a book, or, offending the occasional author who you regard as a
friendly acquaintance. In my opinion however, this should never
factor into your decision on who to review for and how you review.
When you bruise an
author's ego or offend a publisher and they cut you off or turn sour
towards you, you are just going to have to roll with the punches. As
long as you have been honest and fair in your evaluation of a book,
then it is the author or publicist who is in the wrong. Not you.
A book is no different
to a movie, or a restaurant. If you write a book, make a movie, open
a restaurant, you are going to have to reconcile the fact that
criticism goes hand in hand with your profession. As there are movie
critics and food critics, so too should there be book critics.
Critics are the people
(fair critics that is) who keep it real. Bring the
honesty. They critique for fellow readers, movie watchers, foodies
and cannot be bought or bargained with. People choose the critics they follow based on whether their level of honesty appeals. They know instantly - when they read a review
by them - what their options are based on the connection they have formed with the reviewer's blog posts over time.
As for reviewing for
authors...I like to call the reviewing for authors issue, The Amazon
Reviewer Syndrome. Due to the exhaustive amount of Indie and Self Pub
authors on Amazon (not a diss, just a fact), books are being given
away for reviews by the thousands on a daily basis. This is not
exclusive to Amazon anymore and happens via many other outlets, ie
Goodreads, but it all began in the Amazon ebook jungle and
so I stick with The Amazon Reviewer Syndrome for any official
diagnosis.
In return for the free
book many reviewers lose sight of who reviews are supposed to be for
and they end up crossing over into a state of mind where they no
longer review for fellow readers, but review for authors instead.
Many will 'think' they are reviewing for themselves and for fellow
readers, but if they look closely, they are not. They are dicing with
words to ease the egos of authors and to inadvertently promote more
sales for the author by withholding the negatives.
If this is what you
want to do – write reviews in exchange for free books and leave out
the honesty when it comes to the negative elements – then you are a
reviewer for authors or publishers.
Once you paint yourself
into that corner, fellow readers will gradually learn that your
opinion is compromised. Influenced by a predilection for favouring
the feelings of authors.
I would much rather put
effort into wording some fair and respectful negative feedback, over
gagging my honesty for the sake of somebody else's ego or sales
figures.
It is just up to you,
the professional critic, the professional reviewer, to decide how you
want to be perceived as a critic. And I say keep it fair, keep it
respectful and keep it clean, but find the words to say what you want
in the process.
Try not to hit below
the belt when leaving negative reviews. Although, as critics who lean
towards colourful description we will always walk that knife edge.
Authors are happy with emphasis on the positive, but not with
emphasis on the negative, therefore each author will put differing
values on what constitutes 'hitting below the belt'.
In all honesty (since
honesty is what I am about here on the A&M Mayhem blog) if you
want to be a book reviewer and start a blog or website, you will need
to do some deep thinking on who it is that you want to review for.
Especially if you are planning on accepting free books in exchange
for a review.
If you review for
authors, then life will be simple and carefree for you. But if you
review for fellow readers, things can get a bit tricky. You need to
understand that there could be repercussions in your relationships
with authors and publishers, but as long as you stick with the adage
'say what you mean, don't say it mean', then you will always be able
to hold the high ground and be proud of what you are doing.
In the process, you may also learn how to juggle things to keep everybody happy, even the authors and publishers.
In the process, you may also learn how to juggle things to keep everybody happy, even the authors and publishers.
- MM
Well written. However, you seem to have forgotten one person who you might review for: yourself.
ReplyDeleteAnd reviewing for yourself, while appearing very similar to reviewing for other readers, is different. And it gives you the high ground from start to finish, no matter what. You in fact are the god of your little review world.
Reviewing for others can lead to self-censorship due to societal pressures or changing mores that you might not agree with.
I am trying to find the balance between reviewing for myself, others and publishers [as I've joined Netgalley and now can read and review e-arcs].
Hi mate,
DeleteYes, I see what you mean. I think my formula is a mish mash of reviewing for myself and for others all in the one bundle. I know a lot of the people who read my reviews (and I also read theirs so we kind of know all our likes and dislikes).
When I review, I keep true to my integrity. As long as I am keeping tru to my integrity then that is the part that is reviewing for myself. the larger portion of the review is for others. I always have in mind what others like to know about a book.
ie: I know fellow readers who don't like graphic sex or graphic violence in a book, therefore I make sure to touch on those aspects if a book contains excessive amounts of them. It helps a person decide whether they want to spend money on a book, if they know it contains things they hate.
So, I will always be in there reviewing for myself while I am reviewing for others, and trying to not offend publishers and authors. :)
What a well written piece. It annoys me that some authors expect that giving you their book ensures a good review. For me being a reviewer is all about helping the reader not the writer. If the book is good then I will give it the praise I feel it deserves
ReplyDelete
DeleteThanks very much. :)
Yes, so annoying. The author needs to understand that it isn't personal. We don't dislike their book on purpose. I think they get so used to people telling them what they want to hear that many get surprised when someone dares to points out the flaws.