Calvani, Mayra: The Slippery Art of Book Reviewing

[calico_reaction]

Comments

[phoenixfalls]

Fascinating.

Not a book for me, because I can tell I'd just be disagreeing with them all the time, but it was cool to hear your thoughts and your engagement with the authors.

I despise plot-summary reviews myself, but then, my favorite book reviewer is Jo Walton on Tor.com, who it sounds like breaks ALL of their rules AND is getting paid to do it. . . ;D

And yeah, where your blog fits in the grand scheme of book reviewing is very tricky. . . because in the longer threads especially it is just like a book group. Which is what makes it so much fun!

[calico_reaction]

Jo Walton usually has the advantage of reviewing and discussing books that've been around for a while, and for anything new she talks about, she does a spoilery and non-spoilery post, as she did for WISE MAN'S FEAR.

I like her work, even if I don't read all of the reviews all the time.

[phoenixfalls]

True. . . although in my local paper at least there's a decent sized section devoted to "discoveries" and "from the vault" sorts of books that have been out for a while, and then there's always the opportunity to review a book when it's being rereleased in a new edition. . . but those still end up being pretty much plot summaries with a teensy bit of commentary on why people should pick the book up. . .

[squirrel_monkey]

And then there's this: http://booksandpals.blogspot.com/2011/03/greek-seaman-jacqueline-howett.html

[phoenixfalls]

OMG, that's so bad. . . it is exactly like watching a train wreck.

[calico_reaction]

Yes, yes it is.

[calico_reaction]

And isn't that a lovely train wreck? Sheesh... that author should be ashamed of herself.

[weasel_of_d00m]

you should see the cover of the copy I have - http://www.librarything.com/work/5559006/book/71555994 *crosses fingers that the correct one comes through* I much prefer your version!

[calico_reaction]

I noticed that one on Barnes & Nobles' site... it's cute, in its own way. :)

[shel99]

Interesting! FWIW, I like your reviews just the way they are :)

On one hand it makes sense when they say to review what you know/like (if you don't like romance, don't review it, etc), but on the other hand, as a reader who seems to have very similar reading habits to you, I'd be very interested to hear what you think of books outside of our little speculative fiction box. Maybe the general public who reads a ton of mysteries wouldn't get much out of a mystery review from you, but I would because I am the same kind of reader that you are. Just a thought.

[calico_reaction]

FWIW, I like your reviews just the way they are :)

Thank you. :)

And you're right: I have read non-spec fic books in the past, and will certainly read more when they come of interest to me (I've got at least three in my TBR pile now, maybe more). It's just a case of finding the right time to read them!

[temporaryworlds]

This sounds like an interesting read. I can't help but giggle over how they seem to say "don't spoil the book" and then provide reviews that spoil every bit of book but the ending. I see tons of professional reviews that do this and it drives me bonkers, because they are supposedly the experts and now I know pretty much everything that happened in the book (this happened for The Adoration of Jenna Fox). I know that the longer I review things, the lighter I keep the summary part of the book review. It should be enough to get people interested, and inform them about the beginning of the book

[calico_reaction]

They spoiled the ending for LIMITLESS? Oh no! That looked like a fun movie, but not one I'd catch in theaters... maybe when it finds its way to HBO. :)

And thanks for your comments. It was an interesting read, even if I didn't agree with them a lot of the time, I could see their points.

[temporaryworlds]

Not necessarily the ending, but pretty much the last scene is in the trailer. So where I should be going "how is he going to deal with this?" all I can think is "oh I've seen this part in the trailer." Ugh.