Since I've gotten into writing book reviews online, it seems that I read books a bit differently than I used to. Well, the ones for pleasure are still that...a pleasure. But when there's one to read for a publisher, my critical side rears its head. Guess that's normal.
What gets me, though, is searching through other reviews for the same materials I'm reading. When certain books get rave reviews, or are held up in high regard when I wasn't a fan, I have to wonder. Are book bloggers binding themselves to give the high five to materials because they've received a free copy to read? Or maybe they just like *everything*? I do realize that everyone's going to differ in what they like or deem good literature. But when a book isn't edited well, or has badly executed dialogue, seems to me it's up to the one writing the critique to point that out.
I have a review coming up and it's making me fret. While I want to be honest, at the same time, I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. But a reviewer doesn't do anyone any favors when they go nuts for a publication that's either mediocre, or poorly written. And to think that because something has been bound and put on a store bookshelf that it *deserves* to be published should be the farthest thing from our minds. There's lots of drivel out there.
Gentle honesty. Maybe that's what I'm driving at.
What gets me, though, is searching through other reviews for the same materials I'm reading. When certain books get rave reviews, or are held up in high regard when I wasn't a fan, I have to wonder. Are book bloggers binding themselves to give the high five to materials because they've received a free copy to read? Or maybe they just like *everything*? I do realize that everyone's going to differ in what they like or deem good literature. But when a book isn't edited well, or has badly executed dialogue, seems to me it's up to the one writing the critique to point that out.
I have a review coming up and it's making me fret. While I want to be honest, at the same time, I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. But a reviewer doesn't do anyone any favors when they go nuts for a publication that's either mediocre, or poorly written. And to think that because something has been bound and put on a store bookshelf that it *deserves* to be published should be the farthest thing from our minds. There's lots of drivel out there.
Gentle honesty. Maybe that's what I'm driving at.
