I hate the kind of review that tells the reader what he already knows; or what to think and how to feel about an author; and/or outlines the plot; and tries to imagine that the author is writing on x number of levels and is unknowingly meaning this, that, or the other - doing a psychological number on himself and others. I try to pass on to you only the insights that I, as one reader, glean from the book and why.
Then there is the formidable threat of the designation of stars to the author. Most non-professional critics judge books only by how much they enjoyed them. Hence, there are tens of millions of four star books on Goodreads and at Amazon. To be sure, awarding stars is a personal thing - and without rules. But stars don't designate pass or fail. They are only signs of how remarkable each individual book was to that one reader.
It pays to have star-awarding criteria and a checklist if one is going to criticize other authors' works consistently. Something to make the system uniform even if only unique to the one reviewer's ratings.
I rarely give a book five stars. I should say almost never. I gave Pope John Paul II five for his Letter to Artists. Most versions of the Bible. The Apocrypha. The books from French in Action and Master Moy's Tai Chi in English and French. You see where I'm going. My personal list of masterworks.
Otherwise, I'm saving that one for the work of the century so that there will be a distinct designation left for it when it comes. And it will come (as it's long overdue) perhaps in the form of an undiscovered past masterpiece or archeological find with new information that changes the world. Perhaps a first work by a new author. I'm waiting for it.
My own four star designations are usually works of literature, poetry, science, math, or history that are truly outstanding and that I think will withstand time. Or books that are exceptional in some other way. Unique. Thought provoking. Well researched.
Three stars means I loved the book, would recommend it to others, and would read the author again.
Twos are lacking something, as far as I'm concerned. Someone might love them; they're published, aren't they?
One stars designates a waste of time. I usually explain why I believe my low opinion to be true. Sloppy editing, typos, bad research, dullness, even a certain lack of joie de vivre in story telling. (Hey, wake up! You're writing.)
I usually bless the Goodreads page with my short critiques and, in the past, have shared them with Facebook and also here at Petty Gulf Life. As of now, I'm only going to rate books with stars for Facebook and talk about the books a little on FridayReads. I'll share the review here, because Petty Gulf Life is a public forum that matches my Goodreads designation.
I hope you enjoy a summer of good reading. I also hope that my simple accounts of the books I share with you help you to make selections that are interesting, intelligent, fun, and worth your while. Friend me, if you are a member of Goodreads, and I'll also use your reading list to choose books I may have missed otherwise.
