I am constantly at war with this topic, and it's something that I have been discussing with my writerly friends of late. In his timely fashion, Chuck Wendig has done a post on the subject which is worth checking out.
My thoughts are this, always be honest. Whether it's negative or positive, you should always be honest. A review is an opinion to me; my thoughts on the book. In regards to negative feedback, constructive criticism is necessary. Telling someone you hate their book is not enough. You should provide constructive reasons for why. Now, they may seem valid to you, but not to others. That's why it's your review, your opinion. People can take it or leave it.
As for the author, this is where the 'sensitivities' come into play. Authors should support one another, I agree with this. The writing community has 'it's a small world' syndrome, so shit can come back to bite you on the ass. That being said, in my head space being honest is supporting them. If I didn't like your book, then I feel that I should tell you why. Whether they agree, listen or throw poop at me is their prerogative.
I approach reviews the same way that I want others to with my work. I'm not interested in hearing that it made you shit rainbows. In order to grow as a writer, I need to know what didn't work, as well as what did. Giving me a shiny gold star review doesn't really tell me anything other than you liked it. Sure, it's an ego boost, but where do I go from here?
If you didn't like it, I'd be more annoyed if you lied, and said you loved it, than if you tore it limb from limb. Does everyone agree? No. Can everyone handle constructive criticism? It appears not.
I do give negative feedback on books that I feel deserves it, and I will continue to do so in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment