Book review: poll

[tamaranth]

[Poll #708213]

I deliberately haven't specified the medium of the review -- could be LJ, printed magazine, respectable website, misspelt rants in 'customer reviews' section of Amazon. Does that make a difference to you? Should it?

Comments

[yonmei.livejournal.com]

If it's a well-written review in itself, I might want to read it even if I already know I don't want to read the book.

If it's a badly-written review, contrariwise.

[lamentables.livejournal.com]

There isn't a 'it depends' option. If I intend to read a book I most likely won't read the reviews, I will read reviews to find out stuff about an otherwise unknown book, or gather opinions on something I'm uncertain about.

Oh, and 'other, which I shall expand in comments' = I read all the Vector reviews whether I'm interested or not for proof-reading/editing purposes.

[tamaranth.livejournal.com]

I'd thought the 'it depends' is covered by 'I would', rather than 'I do' ... it's the principle I'm interested in, having overheard someone saying that they never read a reviews site because they haven't read any of the books. That made me wonder if enthusing about a book in a review was a waste of time!

I'll read some reviews of a book I intend to read, skip others. I'll try to skip anything with spoilers, and I get annoyed if there's no warning!

[lamentables.livejournal.com]

Ah yes, I hadn't read the 'would' that way.

If I didn't look at reviews I'd have to spend a lot of time and money a lot more time and money in bookshops in order to figure out what is out there that might interest me.

I am also entertained by reading certain reviewers' opinions after I have read the book.

[tamaranth.livejournal.com]

There are some reviewers who regularly provoke amusement, it's true. <g>

Interesting what you say about spending less time and money in bookshops as a result of reading reviews ... I'm actually much more likely to browse, pick things up on spec, have Accidents in bookshops than to search out something I've seen reviewed. (This is a picky distinction, though: a good review read online will take me straight to Amazon, do not pass go, do not collect £200.)

[lamentables.livejournal.com]

That's very similar to what I meant - at the moment I have lists (mental and actual) of things that I'm interested in. I'll either shop online immediately for these things or wait until I find them secondhand or otherwise very cheap.

In a new bookshop I'll browse to see what is around that had previously escaped my notice and might end up with something unexpected. Bizarrely though (well I think it's bizarre) I don't actually like browsing in new bookshops very much - I need a purpose, a thread to follow - which is why I do so much of my shopping for books, music and DVDs online.

Secondhand bookshops are a completely different matter. See the acquistions on 8th April, about 6 of which were picked up because of the nationality of the author or the amusing title and then purchased because the blurb seemed interesting.

[gummitch.livejournal.com]

I tend to be very cagey in reading a review, just in case of spoilers, but at the very least the last paragraph of a review is usually some soft of overview, so can give some clues.

The medium matters less than the reviewer. If I respect their views, and know their tastes intersect with mine to at least some extent, then I'll give the review more weight than from someone I don't know.

[tamaranth.livejournal.com]

I believe you have seen some of my responses to spoilers, scrawled in rageful red ink on wodges of proffreding.

Agree re reviewer-based weighting, for sure. Though some reviewers with whom I tend to agree will still give away too many details for me to feel happy reading their reviews pre-book.

[brisingamen.livejournal.com]

I often read reviews because I like the reviewer's writing style and am interested in what they do as well as what they say.

I'm also that rare beast, someone who is not remotely bothered about spoilers, so I never mind the thought that the end may be given away. The journey is always interesting, even if you know your destination.

I still think reviews are worth writing, and worth reading.

[tamaranth.livejournal.com]

I never mind the thought that the end may be given away.

For me it depends on the book, and to some extent on the genre. Thinking back, the spoilers that have bothered me most concern plot twists in novels that are the latest instalment of a greater work. If I already care about the characters or the events, I want to find out what happens gradually, at the pace the writer intended.

Also, thinking about books with a Twist (The Family Tree, Never Let Me Go) the whole build-up to the Surprise is lost if you know the nature of that surprise. I may be the only reader who didn't see it coming in the Ishiguro, but in that case I'd avoided reading any but the most general reviews because I knew there was a twist.

[brisingamen.livejournal.com]

I seem to be able to detach my reading from the knowledge of what's coming; I'd never really thought about it, it is just something that I do, so it came as a surprise to me some years back to find that not everyone could do it like that. Obviously, I've tried to avoid giving away the ending when writing reviews, but for my own part, I read on serenely.

[fjm.livejournal.com]

Chiming in here because it's very much an "all of the above".

I just like reading reviews. I read the TV reviews by Robert Hanks in the Indie and we don't even have an ariel. I think what I like is "analysis as creativity" and mostly that's to be found in reviews.

[brisingamen.livejournal.com]

I like that idea of 'analysis as creativity'. That fits very well with my sense of what I'd doing when I read reviews (and I particularly enjoy Robert Hanks's tv reviews too, and Tom Sutcliffe's). Both PK and I take a good deal of pleasure in reading a well-argued review; they're the things we're most likely to share over the papers.

(Oh, and in the case of Nicholas Lezard, of the Grauniad and Indy, I read his weekly paperback review choice in the Guardian because while our tastes don't entirely coincide, we seem to like so many of the same things, I'm always interested when he suggests something I've not heard of, because it's likely to be interesting.)

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

Some of it's whether or not I want to read the book, but I'll also read the reviews in New York Review of Science Fiction because a lot of what's said there is interesting.

[purpletigron.livejournal.com]

There's no unique reason why people write book reviews. I am very averse to spoilers. Therefore, I rarely read book reviews of books that I've not yet read.

What I look for:

Book recommendations - of books that I've not yet read; brief, no spoilers, just enough of a taster to help me to decide if the book is worth reading.

Book analyses - of books that I have already read, so spoilers not an issue; still need to be reasonably concise.

I am much more likely to read a piece by a reviewer whose opinion I already respect.

[zoo-music-girl.livejournal.com]

I won't read a review of a book I've already decided to read in case of spoilers (especialy after being spoiled for the last Ishiguro) but if I don't know anything about the book I'll read a review if I stumble upon one that looks interesting from first glance.