What constitutes an unfair book review?

[moderntimes]

I've read the occasional book review here and elsewhere that I regard as unfair. Generally these unfair reviews are such due to these items:

1. The reviewer doesn't like the type of book that's being reviewed. For example, if the reviewer prefers "cozy" mysteries (the Agatha Christie type) and is reviewing a more violent or hard-boiled story, the book will be downgraded simply because this isn't the reviewer's cup of tea.

2. The reviewer downgrades the book due to typographical or other mechanical errors. These are principally the fault of the publisher and the editing staff, not the author. Of course, the author gets final review of the galley proofs prior to the book going to press, but mechanical errors should generally be outside of the review's scope.

3. The reviewer doesn't like the author's style. Now this is more subjective but if the reviewer prefers, say, a more abbreviated and zippy narrative and the book has longer sentences and more complex passages, and downgrades it accordingly. Understand that the narrative may be fine from a quality standpoint, it's just not what the reviewer prefers.

All these are unfair, as I see it. The reviewer should rate the book on the skill of the author and how the author portrays characters or situations, how scenes are accurately and vividly described, how the book has rhythm and balance, whether the characters are believable, and of course, for a "factual" novel (like a modern spy thriller) whether there are "gun goofs" or other mistakes that show that the author hadn't done his/her homework on details.

In other words, the quality of the book, its impact on the reader, how the themes are worked throughout the book, if the events are realistic and not contrived, whether conversations sound realistic, all these things contribute to the overall rating of a book, and the reviewer must distance personal likes and dislikes totally and approach the book from a very objective stance. Now, yes, of course the reviewer must comment upon how the novel impacted the reader, but still, that impact must be viewed from an unbiased angle. Personal likes or dislikes about a certain style cannot enter into judgment about the book's overall rating.

How say you? Do you agree? Do you have other complaints about how a book might be unfairly reviewed?

[gali]

First and foremost reviews are always subjective, since they reflect the opinions and individual tastes of their writers.

I agree with your first point.

I partly agree with the second point. If the typographical or other mechanical errors are just a few, I don't downgrade the book, though I may comment on them. However if there are errors on almost every other page, and as a reader I don't care whose fault it is, and they hamper my enjoyment of the book, the book deserves to be rated less in my view.

I disagree about the third point. Reviews should be based on both the reviewer's feeling and the quality of the book. Quality is a matter of view as well after all. If the reviewer can't connect to the book and explains why, not just saying the book sucks, I find the review to be fair. I rate books based on writing, skills, style, and all those other fine points you mentioned, and my feelings on it. Reviews which are impersonal are dry and un-trusty in my view. I read a review to see what the reviewer thought about the book after all and not just the for the factual data. Otherwise I will just read the back cover.... There is no such think as a completely objective review, however hard one may try. Personal presences always enter the equation, and they make the review more reliable and interesting. For me review is more than a dry spiel about the book, and I always take into account that tastes differ and base my decision accordingly.

[Fran]

As has been pointed out a review is always to some degree subjective - it is after all the personal response of one reader at a given time. IMO a review is unfair if:
a) the reviewer didn't actually read the book (obvious but it happens) or gave it only a casual reading.
b) the reviewer brings their personal prejudice or views (positive or negative) to the review.
c) the reviewer allows their personal opinion of the author, whether good or bad, to influence their review.
d) the reviewer makes no effort to stand up their views with examples - that applies to both positive and negative opinions.
e) the reviewer does not give their honest opinion, positive or negative.

The occasional spelling, typo or grammar error I can live with but if it gets to the point where the readers' attention is totally focused on these errors then that is definitely something I would want highlighted in the review as it would definitely influence my buying or reading decision.

When we think of an unfair review we are generally focused it terms of it being unfair to the author but it is also important not to be unfair to the reader of the review. Misleading the reader of the review either deliberately or out misplaced sense of loyalty or sympathy for the author is equally unfair.
I don't think an author can have cause for complaint if the review is honestly written and clearly argued.

[bookowlie]

Moderntimes, Gali, and Fran, All of you make valid points! Gali and Fran, I completely agree with your opinions regarding mechanical errors. With self-published books, authors often don't utilize a professional proofreader or editor. In these cases, I think the author does bear responsibility for the errors in the finished work. As Gail mentioned, a reviewer will often mention errors even if the overall rating is not affected. If errors are overwhelming in a self-published work, I absolutely think this becomes fair game in considering the rating.

Fran, You bring up some excellent points regarding a person's personal prejudices or views clearly influencing the review. I also agree with your point about some people casually reading a book or skimming it just enough to write a review.

Regarding Moderntimes' third point, I have to agree with Gali. For example, I think J.K. Rowling's overly wordy style, particularly with descriptions, bogged down her stories. I'm sure all the Harry Potter book lovers will throw tomatoes at me, but this is my opinion. I think this would be a valid issue to bring up in a review, regardless of my personal style preferences,

[gali]

Valid points Fran and bookowlie!

[bookowlie]

Just edited my previous comment since I noticed two grammatical errors. It's funny since one of the things we're discussing is errors!

[zeldas_lullaby]

HA HA, BookOwlie!!

Yeah, BookOwlie beat me to the following point: those of us who are self-published don't have a staff of editors. And there is a difference between an obvious typo, versus an abuse of the English language. I personally don't mind occasional sentences that aren't worded perfectly, or that sort of thing; but indeed, if you're trying to wade through something that's a total mess, then that should definitely be reflected in the rating.

Randomly, looking at Fran's points b + c, let's just say it's a good thing I'm not on the review team.

Circling back to ModernTimes' third point, style is a tricky issue. I think everyone on here knows that I can barely read anything that lacks forward momentum with the plot. It's just not going to hold me. However, I do realize that that's just me; that a lot of people can and do enjoy slower works. But I do tend to resent books that take forever and a day to get there already!

I've noticed people rating books down if they don't match their genre. I'm slightly against that and feel that a book should be rated on its merits alone, because not all books fit neatly into a given genre. I mean, so what if it was listed as a crime book but was really more of a romance? Say so in the review, but don't mark down for it. That's a slight quibble of mine, although I see the exception if, say, a book is marketed for children or teens and is loaded with filth.

Fun topic!

-- August 4th, 2015, 1:34 pm --

I think also that a book should be reviewed based on the experience of the reviewer: did the book keep you on the edge of your seat? Did it leave you wanting to read late into the night? If nonfiction, did it interest you or educate you or make you think, or did it put you to sleep or offend your sensibilities? Was the book atmospheric? Was it creative/inventive? Did it take you someplace?

[bookowlie]

Zeldas - All good points. I have noticed the same thing you mentioned about people lowering a rating if the genre isn't exact. Many books don't fit neatly into a genre. I read one review recently where the reviewer's sole reason for giving less than 4 stars was that the book wasn't a mystery yet was in the Crime/Mystery/Thriller/Horror genre. He/she stated that, since the murderer was stated right from the start, that it wasn't a mystery. Still, doesn't it still belong in this genre as a Crime novel?! The summary stated that there was a dead body and someone who killed that person, so I would assume a crime was committed.

[GandalfTheFey]

Agreed on all points. Those who fault a certain genre or mark down because of a few typographical errors probably fall into the unfair camp. Those who don't like an authors style... hm. Not sure.

But you forgot the worst offenders!!! Those who disagree with our personal opinions

[LivreAmour217]

In my opinion, the most unfair thing that a reader can do is not finish a book and still write a review about it. If you don't finish the story, you don't have all of the necessary information to write a fair review. Sometimes a book has a dull start and picks up further in.

I also think that it's unfair to review a book from a genre that you don't enjoy. In this case, you're biased from the beginning and less likely to write an objective review.

[zeldas_lullaby]

BookOwlie, you raise an interesting question!

If there's a dead body, then does that make it a crime novel? You would think, "No, not necessarily," but how many books have dead people but aren't crime/mystery books?

Also, it brings to mind the TV show Monk. In most of the episodes, we knew who the killer was up front, but the mystery was, how'd he commit the crime with that airtight alibi? I used to enjoy that show, because the answer was always a total mindbender. I do agree that such a premise constitutes a mystery. On the other hand, I've seen some TV dramas where you know who the bad guy is, but the detectives are just trying to track him down. That definitely lacks mystery. Of course, it probably also constitutes bad television. Hm...

Gandalf, it's like you've got my number.

Livre, you make good points! I tried to read a book a few months ago that was in the bargain bin at Books-a-Million. I didn't enjoy it after the first few chapters, and I was left wondering if it was a bad book, or if its strong "summer beach read" formula was just something that I'm not into anymore. (I used to love reading Eileen Goudge back in college, but who knows?) That said, of course I didn't review it anywhere online, seeing as I didn't make it too far.

[Fran]

Excellent discussion points being raised.
I think genre is notoriously difficult to get right as so many books could easily fit in a number of catagories or indeed fall between genre. But I think if an author declares a book to be in a specific genre then it is perfectly valid for a reviewer to highlight if it doesn't observe the accepted norms of that genre ... though I wouldn't necessarly say that alone is a reason to mark it down.

@GandalfTheFey
How did we possibly overlook the biggest, blackest, most heinous sin of all - a reviewer who doesn't agree with us. I'd put them in the stocks & force them to read the book repeatedly until they repent of their sin.

[zeldas_lullaby]

It's like Gandalf and I are of one mind.

Great point, Fran! Well, one problem with this site is that we don't offer categorization of genre to smaller genres or subgenres, such as New Adult (versus YA), or even memoir (versus general nonfiction), or reference (also versus general nonfiction). Authors on this site kind of have to choose a one-book-fits-all for their book. It works out most of the time... Like, the books I write go into the YA category, which is fine, but I intend them as Visionary Fiction, a new genre which encompasses growth in awareness, spirituality, mild paranormal aspects, etc. (I love putting that kind of stuff into my books!) But rather than pick "other fiction" when I submit a book, I just pick YA. I think it would do, though, for the reviewers to keep in mind that there are limited options for us writers when we submit!

[kbasoff]

The reviewer has not read the book thoroughly.
Overly Critical not seeing anything not one thing positive.
Overly bias and Judgmental of the subject.

[gali]

Excellent discussion points being raised.
I think genre is notoriously difficult to get right as so many books could easily fit in a number of catagories or indeed fall between genre. But I think if an author declares a book to be in a specific genre then it is perfectly valid for a reviewer to highlight if it doesn't observe the accepted norms of that genre ... though I wouldn't necessarly say that alone is a reason to mark it down.

@GandalfTheFey
How did we possibly overlook the biggest, blackest, most heinous sin of all - a reviewer who doesn't agree with us. I'd put them in the stocks & force them to read the book repeatedly until they repent of their sin.

Ditto!