Over the past few weeks I've heard from a number of authors
who have been upset by ratings on public rating boards. A couple were ones I gave lower ratings than
they felt they deserved, but mostly they were writers who just wanted to vent
their frustration with low ratings, what they felt were attacks by trolls, the
unwieldy number of people added to GoodReads simply because they're face book
friends, or other aspects of the rating game that annoyed them.
Every year about this time I stop posting stars or numbers
on Good Reads, LDS Publisher, Amazon, Deseret Book, etc. I and a couple of
other authors and reviewers do this rather than let our views influence the
Whitney judges and voters. Our influence
might be nonexistent, but it helps us feel we're doing our part to encourage
others to make up their own minds rather than follow whatever is the popular
vote. Lately I've been thinking I might
give up rating books on these sites altogether.
There are several problems I've become aware of in the past
few years concerning assigning a number or star rating to a book. To begin with, the ratings mean different
things to different people. I consider
these rankings personal opinions; others consider them professional judgments. If
I give a book a five it's because I think it's worthy of Whitney Award
consideration and it has enough depth to have me thinking about it long after I
finish reading it, a four means it didn't interest me as much as a five or it
might have a few flaws, but it's still worthy of Whitney consideration, a three
generally means I liked most of it, but it just didn't capture my whole-hearted
attention, a two means I couldn't really get into it, and a one means boring,
crude, offensive, or a waste of time. No
marking can mean potential Whitney, so boring or disgusting I didn't finish it,
I forgot to rate it, well written, but I didn't like it, or almost anything. You'll
notice none of my ratings have to do with how well the book is written; they
mostly have to do with my reading tastes.
Another reviewer whom I respect a great deal recently rated the same
book I rated on one of these sites with very different numbers. She loved it; I didn't. She works with teenagers and loves teen
fiction; I don't so much. We both agreed
the author has style, writes well, uses great dialog, but I found all the teen
angst less than fascinating while she thought the story delved into serious
issues. One of us is not right and the
other wrong; we each rated the book according to our personal response to it.
(By the way I don't dislike all teen fiction and I've read quite a bit of it lately
while I've been recuperating from surgery.
Some were superb and I hope they receive awards and recognition for a
job well done. I may even review a
couple of them here on this blog.)
A Romance fan is probably going to rate Sarah Eden higher
than Orson Scott Card and Anita Stansfield's fans are probably not as enamored
with Dan Wells as they are with her.
Those ratings are a measurement of how much the reader enjoyed the book
and the reader's personal taste in reading material. I have two books on my keeper shelf that are
not well written, in fact from a professional standpoint, they're pretty clumsy
and amateurish, but I love them and would rate them high, if I rated them,
because of their strong personal appeal and excellent research. On the other hand
I've seen wonderful books marked down because the reader expected one genre and
the book picked up proved to be something else.
Another problem I'm aware of in this rating game is people
who troll. That is, they give negative
ratings to people they're jealous of, to get revenge, because they think it's a
funny game, to make a friend look better by comparison, because the author is
perceived to support a cause or belong to a group they oppose, etc. The
anonymous nature of the internet seems to bring out the worst in some people. One writer claims she got one star ratings on
a book that hasn't even been released yet and the ratings weren't given by
reviewers who often do get advance readers copies.
Sometimes the opposite problem arises when writers who
belong to the same critique group, guild, town, family, or other organization
attempt to show their loyalty to each other by flooding rating sites with high
marks for the work of one of their own. Also some writers and groups have
campaigns to get everyone they know to go to a particular site and rate their
books high. This is sad and misleading since the majority of readers aren't
aware they can rate the books they read or are uninterested in doing so. Many readers don't even know where to go to
do it. (There's a link on my sidebar)
I, and almost every other writer I know, have had our
feelings hurt at some time by someone who gave us a low rating on a book we
spent months, possibly years, writing. After
being a writer as long as I have, I recognize that not everyone is going to
like my books and those who do will like some of them better than others. I freely admit that I don't like every book
some of my favorite writers have written, but that isn't because they aren't
well-written and they won't appeal to someone else. It's easy to say, "Get over it. Don't take ratings on these public pages so
seriously." Most writers know
ratings have little to do with sales or popularity, but still low marks
hurt.
If someone really wants to know how well written a book is
or if it's the kind of book he or she wants to read, I suggest going to a
reputable newspaper, magazine, or blog reviewer. They can also checkout the synopsis of the
book listed by the bookstore or on the bookliner. Another source is friends whose taste in
reading material is similar to their own.
To anyone who likes to look for ratings, I say go ahead, it's kind of
fun, but remember they don't really mean much, and if you're one of those who bestows
ratings, be honest, but don't be deliberately hurtful. And to my fellow writers, I suggest growing a
thick skin, consider the source, and avoid making career choices based on those
ratings. Not only have I received a one
star rating, but I've seen one star ratings for Brandon Mull, Rachel Nunes,
Josi Killpack, Stephanie Black, Jeff Savage, and many other authors who are
doing just fine and are counted among the best. The rating that matters is the number
of books sold.
No comments:
Post a Comment