Reviewing the Reviews
Review; [n] an essay or article that gives a critical evaluation.
Ah, book reviews. Those snippets of writing that can recommend someone to pick up a book or to avoid it like the plague. A review by an ‘acclaimed’ critic, (I’m still not exactly sure what this means. Someone who knows what they’re talking about, presumably) in a magazine or newspaper can quite often make or break a new book. Unfortunately, there are a lot of reviews out there that don’t quite manage to balance properly between information and opinion. The rest of this article will take a look at the good, the bad, and the ugly when it comes to book reviews. Most of which fit into a handful of different categories.
Let’s begin, shall we?
Type 1 – Blurb Reviews
Blurb reviews are thusly named because all they seem to do is regurgitate what’s on the back page of a book. This is all very well and good, but it shouldn’t be classed as a review. Especially when you take into account the actual meaning of the word ‘review’. It’s nice to know what happens in the story before I buy it…but if I needed a plot breakdown I can just read the back of the actual book.
Type 2 – Unsubstantiated Opinion Reviews
At the other end of the spectrum are reviews which blather on about how great or horrid the book is, without actually giving the reader any information as to why this conclusion was reached. Ok, so the critic liked/hated it. For all the reader knows it could be because they simply don’t like the genre, or hero-worship the author. If the writing is poor or the plot looks like Swiss cheese, then personally, I’d want to know why as opposed to simply having to read a rant.
Type 3 – Off Topic Reviews
We’ve all read at least one of these. This type of review tends to start off all very well and good…and ends up talking about something almost entirely unrelated to the actual book. Usually, regarding a certain technique, or similar author. Reviews need to stay succinct and to the point, otherwise there’s a danger of this occurring.
Type 4 – Wrong Tone Reviews
Although this is a rare type of review, they do still exist. How many times have you been reading a review that completely and utterly bored you with their use of formal language and boring, purely analytical description? On the other side of the coin, there are some who insist upon using humour and informal language when talking about a more serious novel.
Type 5 – Balanced Reviews
Finally, we come to the type of book review which actually works. It has stated opinions and reasons of the critic, as well as a [small] plot summary to show that they’ve actually understood what the heck is going on within the novel. It’s in the correct tone, and it sticks to the point. That is, reviewing the book in a clear manner with little to no waffle.
———-
So what have we learned? Well, obviously different people do things in different ways, but the key to a good book review is to take all of the above points into careful consideration. Reviews are there not only to voice opinions, but to influence the opinions of others, and to do that they have to be well thought out and carefully written.
To leave you with a quote: “What is in question is a kind of book reviewing which seems to be more and more popular: the loose putting down of opinions as though they were facts, and the treating of facts as though they were opinions.” – Gore Vidal.
6 Responses to “Reviewing the Reviews”
Leave a Reply
Archives
Book of the Fortnight
Powered by Wordpress | Design by ElegantThemes
I agree with you
SuperSonic
[...] [For another article about Review types, click HERE] [...]
My Friend Asked me to Read your Post on Friday.Your post was Well written.Please Keep it up .I Like reading on book reviews.
This is just epic!!! Thankyou for making this available
I bookmarked this page. I really like your site. I’ll bookmark the other pages when I have time
You have got the point over better than I at any time could, thanks!