What makes a good review?

Perspective is a funny thing. This week has felt “warm,” despite the fact that high temperatures haven’t crept past the 30s. Part of that is because the sun is out these days, and part is because highs were in the teens last week. Anyway, the sunshine and “warm” weather has inspired me, and you get to be the lucky victims of this inspiration…

Still only about 3/4 finished with my latest read, but I thought I’d start some ancillary posts to fill in the gaps between book reviews. This post marks my first attempt in that direction.

Admittedly, the whole review/rating process is pretty subjective. People have individual tastes that are impossible to ignore completely when opining on, well, pretty much anything. And because of those individual preferences, multiple reviews on the same product or service tend to vary widely (particularly in the case of “average Joe” reviews.)

Take movie reviews, for example. Yahoo! Movies is good at showing rating averages as well as individual scores and reviews, from both critics and regular viewers. The average is just that: an average. Delve a bit deeper to see the individual ratings, and you’ll see that those scores (letter grades, for Yahoo!) usually span the gamut for any movie. Even movies widely lauded will still nab a few F’s from individual viewers. (Critics tend to be more consistent, but only slightly so.) For books, you can find a similar phenomenon over at Goodreads.

Does this mean that reviews and their scores are worthless? Not exactly. Actually, not at all. If they were, people wouldn’t be making a living off of reviewing movies/books/video games/etc. So the idea of reviewing a product or service and sharing your experience with the world must have merit. Isn’t that why we have Ebert & Roper, IGN, and even this blog? :)

So then, it comes down to the quality of the review. To me, this equates to three key aspects:

1.) Defined criteria. The reviewer needs to be clear on the specific standards upon which the final score/verdict is based. That doesn’t mean that we should expect a bulleted list at the top of every review, but in reading through it, those criteria should be explained.

2.) Substantial detail. The review needs to achieve that balance of providing examples to back up its score without becoming too cumbersome with detail or crossing over into Spoilerland.

3.) “Relative” impartiality. Any set of criteria that is too skewed or specific to one’s particular tastes risks alienating a wider audience. I promise to not say a book is bad because it didn’t have bunnies in it. I do acknowledge that demonstration of good writing skills is a standard that may not be as important to a lot of you. Sorry, that’s one I can’t back down on. :) (It’s one of the reasons why I will probably never read through Stephanie Meyer’s books. Again, apologies. Just my flavor.)

So there you have it. My standards when deciding whether to listen to a review or chuck it out the window. I’ll probably post my informal set of criteria for opining on the books I read at some point. What constitutes a high-quality review for you?

Still here (and struggling a bit)

Since I can’t finish a book in a day just yet (my speedreading kit is on layaway), I’m gonna have to figure out some other things to put on this blog. I know you adoring fans await updates with great anticipation.

/sarcasm off

Anyway, for now, just thought I’d pop in and say that I am still plugging away at reading my latest book. It’s a bit of a challenge. The story is slow for a good while, but now that I am about halfway through, it’s picked up the pace somewhat. The language is a bit… dry, as well. It’s very good, very descriptive, but the writer definitely takes her time and throws in quirky details here and there. It does add to the unique charm to the book, but sometimes, I get a bit frustrated. Oh well, I promise not to ditch this one!

Oh also, apparently I need to stop reading altogether until after Christmas. I seem to be ruining someone’s Christmas gifts to me when I speculate on what book to tackle next. Soh-lee Peeg!

Progress Report: The Alchemyst (page 50)

Chapter 6 ends conveniently on page 50, so I figured this would be a good time to post a quick update. I've been in and out of town for the last five weeks for both work and vacation, so today has been a bit of a "catch up" day on housework and friends, so I haven't has nearly as much time to delve into this book as I had hoped. Ah well, c'est la vie...

So far, Michael Scott's book is compelling. The plot is fast-paced, and you are almost instantly thrust into the action, with the necessary explanations interwoven with progressions of the main story. I promise to not post spoilers without ample warning on this blog, and I'll avoid doing so tonight. I'll just say that I'm very much enjoying the story and its cast of characters, thus far.

Three things that stick out most in my mind, from what I've read:

1.) I'm in love with Scott's writing style. It's easy to read, yet eloquent in its execution. Simple, straightforward sentences with elegant embellishment. Younger readers shouldn't have much trouble getting through the pages, while adults can read on with the confidence that this is not just kid stuff.

2.) Scott plays with history, putting his own mystical spin on some of the great catastrophes that have occurred in the last half-millenium. I'm not meticulous enough to wiki all of the events I've read about so far in The Alchemyst, but it's kind of fun to see this playful stretch of the term "historical fiction."

3.) The nods to modern customs and references to pop culture have made me smile. Scott mentions well-known books, movies, music, video games, and tech gadgets of our time. This book was originally published in 2007, so for now, the references are contemporary. I'll be interested to see how readers will view those same references a generation or two from now.

Well, 50 out of 370+ pages in less than an hour. I should be through this by week's end, hopefully much sooner. Sadly, being gone a week from work and having some deadlines tomorrow means I may have to break a couple days from The Alchemyst after tonight. I'm going to try to revisit my book again tonight, after finishing up the last couple loads of laundry. Don't you wish clothes would clean and fold themselves sometimes?