As a book reviewer and one who occasionally reads other book reviews, my generic advice to most people is not to blindly trust the review, but base it on the reviewer. For example, if I find the reviewer and myself enjoying Jeff VanderMeer’s Finch for the same reasons, then it’s most likely that I’ll agree with the writer’s review of other similar titles. However, if I find the reviewer disliking the book for the very reasons I like it (or vice versa), then that particular review is not applicable to my tastes. I’d either look for a reviewer whose preferences are more inclined to mine, or if the said reviewer is truly my opposite, then interpret their recommendations as the reverse.
Here lies the problem with book reviews. I’m only able to make that particular judgment once I’ve read the same book as the book reviewer. What if this is the first time I’m encountering the book reviewer or a book they’re reviewing? In a way, it’s easier these days when you’re reading a book review blog. There’s typically a convenient method of tracking the reviewer’s previous book reviews, and finding a book which you’ve had previous experience with. But that’s not always applicable, whether it’s due to poor archiving services, or simply because there’s little overlap between the books you and the reviewer have read.
One could always buy the book in question, read it, and assess whether you agree with the reviewer. But for some people, this defeats the purpose of the book review. They want to rely on the review so that they know whether the book is worth purchasing in the first place or not. In fact, this is the common expectation of book reviews, hence the publisher’s publicity department sending out books for book reviews.
Which brings me to another paradox of book reviewing, this time on the part of the reviewer. On one hand, I can write a comprehensive review of the book, explaining in detail every incident that piqued my interest, and mentioning the elements that were either successful or failures. This is the reviewer as an actual critic, withholding nothing and being concrete with their examples. On the other end of the spectrum is the expectation that the book review is there to help potential readers make a judgment whether the said title is worth reading (and buying) or not. Suddenly, the critic’s repertoire is discarded: one can’t talk about the ending, for example, without spoiling it for the reader. One can’t quote sentences which reveal too much about the plot (or in some cases, the character). Imagine talking about The Empire Strikes Back and the impact the ending had without revealing that Darth Vader is indeed Luke Skywalker’s father and Leia his sister, or that the situation is compounded by the betrayal of Lando Calrissian, Han Solo’s incarceration in carbonite, and the amputation of our protagonist’s hand. Even the very mention of the visual spectacles of Cloud City is a spoiler element in itself, since it clues in the reader that there’s some confrontation going to happen there, or that the movie won’t reach its conclusion until that particular vista is visited. And it similarly won’t do to sum up the experience in one vague statement such as “it was a good movie, two thumbs up!” any more than a numerical rating (whether 1 to 10 or 1 to 100) could be called a comprehensive review (shall the reader guess why it was missing out on a few points from a perfect score?).
There is also no book review coda to guide book reviewers, be they professional (i.e., paid) or non-professional (i.e., myself and most book review bloggers). Some will gravitate to one end of the spectrum, while others the opposite. I expect most will be somewhere in the middle, experimenting with what they think they can get away with or what their audience expects. And just as book reviewers will have different ethics on the issue, readers of book reviews will have different expectations. There are those who enjoy reading those spoilerific reviews for the sake of articulation and detail. There are others who prefer the more spoiler-free reviews (and “spoiler-free” actually means different things to different people) and are aggravated when they stumble into a review that mentions a crucial plot point. I’ve done my share of attempting to write a spoiler-free review, only to make concessions to spoilers now and then, writing vague statements that skirt around the issue and certainly hinting at the reader that the author has something afoot, although what that specifically is remains unknown (in the same way that we know there’s a twist at the end of M. Night Shaylaman’s films, although what that twist is a mystery).
And I’ll be honest. There are some book reviews I love to read only once I’ve read the book they’re tackling. I nod my head and agree with the reviewer’s assessment, or form mental rebuttals as I read their discourse. And it’s usually during this process that I make my generalization as to whether I find the reviewer’s critique invaluable or inappropriate.
So how about you, BSC Review readers: where do you fall in the book review bracket? Do you actually use book reviews to guide your purchases?
I strive, with the reviews I write, to make my personal bias very clear, painting a picture of the book/magazine that while obviously colored, still gives enough of a feel for the object that a reader hopefully comes away with an idea of whether they would like it on its own terms, rather than mine. I try to figure out what niche of people would actually like the book. There’s not a book out there that _somebody_ wouldn’t like, for some reason or other (be it kitsch, irony, or a downright “fun, fast read”).
To answer the (last) question,no,and generally I never have. I think it’s more having to do with that I don’t need any new more sources, and now i trust my sources enough where I don’t need to read a review, they can just mention it. Even beyond that I’ve always tended to be an impulse buyer, and if I want something I rarely find myself needing a second opinion (I would imagine books would be labeled as ‘minor’ purchases when considering most budgets).
These days, I rarely buy any new book and most of my purchases are much older and specifically targeted (thus, again no need for any other opinion). I think for me, I’m just old enough where purchasing decisions weren’t net aided and I kind of (for the most part) carried on with that. I mean, I do research if I’m buying land or something, not a book.
I will be honest, the only times I really will read a review (besides this site) is when I have already completed the book. I think for me the term review tends to really mean “start of a discussion” if that makes any sense. Just my take though on the whole process. That holds true for books mostly and I think reviews can and need to be seperated by media when you talk about them.
For a video game per say, I will want to read the review and it will affect if I purchase the game or not. Is it a money thing? I dont know but games are more expensive.
Movies, well another area will I will read a review and it will influence my decision if I go or wait for it to show up on HBO.
DVDs, would already have read the movie review if not it would hold the same if it is a direct release to video.
Music, would rather just hear a sample than read a review. If I already have heard the album or own it then the review agains becomes a jumping off point for discussion.
Television reviews since most television is free I want to make my own accessment regardless, so it becomes a discussion jump off point again.
When I write my reviews (if you can call them that) I try to give the reader parts of what I liked as well as an overall feeling of my experience. So it is if you like what I have liked in the past you may like what I have just recommended.