How do you review?

[Leif]

I will be wrapping up Revival and wanted to post my thoughts when I'm done.
I have read a few of the other members reviews/critiques with respect to Stephen King's novels and short stories. Some include comments on the actual subject matter which I found interesting. One reader seemed to struggle with the violent, graphic and disturbing subject.

I would be more concerned with the way it was written, if it held interest, what meaning if any the story might be trying to portray.

I have to say, I am biased as well. I have not read a SK book I didn't like.

Any thoughts?

Leif

 

[carrie's younger brother]

Personally, a few well chosen sentences is what I like to read and how I review. Going on for paragraph after paragraph makes my eyes glaze over. To be honest, I don't even read reviews like that any longer.

 

[Pucker]

Personally, a few well chosen sentences is what I like to read and how I review. Going on for paragraph after paragraph makes my eyes glaze over. To be honest, I don't even read reviews like that any longer.

Very important to remember that average attention span. Social media is a demanding mistress, and people have convinced themselves that they simply don't have any time to . . . you know . . . read stuff.

If you believe some of the research, most people won't even "click" a video that's longer than a minute or two.

I combat this strategy by taking points one at a time. Pick out whatever grabs you the quickest or the strongest, and talk about that. Folks will either respond or they won't (and you can rest assured the thread will never go the way you want it to), but if you don't get any bites, just move on to the next thing you want to talk about.

Whatever happens, if you have strong opinions about specific things and you want to banter, I know at least one guy who will respond to that every time.

If you just liked it and thought it was good . . . that's okay, too . . . but it's not much of a jumping-off point for a discussion.

 

[doowopgirl]

I did like Revival. I like the slow build up. I like the bits of ordinary. The big scene was chilling and frightening. I have read SK books that I liked better than others. I basically review the bits I really like and take comments as they come.

 

[Pucker]

I basically review the bits I really like and take comments as they come.

This is the beauty of a place like this, where in the macro, we're all interested in the same thing, but in the micro, we come at it from varied perspectives.

The thing I like most about coming here (apart from the precious echoes) is when I come across a point about a story I thought I knew well and realize:

"Hmmm . . . I never looked at it that way before."

 

[doowopgirl]

This is the beauty of a place like this, where in the macro, we're all interested in the same thing, but in the micro, we come at it from varied perspectives.

The thing I like most about coming here (apart from the precious echoes) is when I come across a point about a story I thought I knew well and realize:

"Hmmm . . . I never looked at it that way before."

There is always a point of view different from mine. You're right that is the beauty of this place.

 

[danie]

skimom2, you're up!

 

[Grant87]

In my reviews, I try to touch on 3 topics or so. I like to cover certain themes, characters, or scenes that I found interesting and discussion-worthy. I try to keep it fairly brief. I'm no literary analyst, just an avid reader and SK fan.

 

[Walter Oobleck]

No review is complete without saying something about how you spent your summer vacation. Or if you're a Goodreads member, post a pile of moving pictures that bear no relation to story, but people like that stuff and the reviewer picks up a train. So many reviews talk with pictures there at Goodreads. There too, you can find reviews that run the gamut...take any story you enjoy...look at the reviews there...and you find everything under the sun.

If someone...or my self...makes a claim about any story, I prefer the reviewer be subject to the same law applied to the writer. Show us, don't tell us.

Reviews that claim something fashionable...misogynist...or racist...without telling me why the reviewer has made that claim is so much clanging cymbals. Noise. Nothing more nothing less.

Reviews that ask a question about a detail in the story are good.

One thing I've done with stories is to create an index. Stories don't come with one and my indexing is related more to my own failing as a reader. It has always taken me some time to "get it" and indexing helps me get it. That and reading the story five times. Oh...okay...now I get it. Others can read a story once and they're waiting there at the station for me...I come lolly-gagging in, tongue hanging out, damp...and everyone is already boarding the next train to leave the station. I'm left looking at the graffiti and posters on the wall.

But with indexing, it is curious to look at one story's index and compare/contrast that to another story's index. Minor characters fascinate me. We hear so much about the world's population...so it seems like that should be reflected in story. Reminded of a story I read, character in Chicago...and I'd been in some of the same places, but the story did not bring back that Chicago to me, not the one I saw. Too, cultural...thingies...indexing them. King's stories generate indexes 12 pages long...nothing but character names, cultural thingies (music, books, the rich and filthy, the famous and infamous)...and there could be 3-4 pages of minor characters. The gum-chewing waitress with shoulders like Sunny Liston. And I've discovered that other writers whose stories generate long indexes are the kind of stories I like to read.

Places, too, index them. If a writer says "they entered the restaurant"...I make a note: restaurant. Ready to turn the channel yet? Say like with King...and other "good" story-tellers, we don't get "restaurant"...we get something better. Needful Things. But in the end, my indexes only mean something to me and I don't get funding to adjudicate hybridity, theorize diaspora...but there's drywall that needs mudding and in the end that is more gratifying. And so it goes.

 

[Kurben]

Reviews.... Who are your audience`? If you write here it is reasonably safe to assume a good grasp about kings work but otkerwise in a review somewhere not only kingfans are the audience you would have to consider that. I always try to be brief but concise in reviews. Something special you think are good and or something thats lacking compared with other Kingstories. To just say, when its King were talking about, that its a typical King doesn't mean anything because he has written so many different kind of stories.

 

[RichardX]

The Internet seems to have spawned an entire industry of amateur book and movie reviewers. I'm astounded at how long some of those reviews are. It's seems a bit weird and narcissistic to devote so much time and energy to expressing your subjective opinion of a book. I do sometimes come across something interesting but that is the exception rather than the rule.

 

[skimom2]

skimom2, you're up!

LOL! That's my job, so I don't do so much here I can say that structure and language almost always come into my reviews, and anachronisms get dinged (gently--lol). I'm not nitpicky, though; no 'glocks don't have safeties' or 'that particular model of car had TWO doors, not four' from me, unless it's a vital plot point. I roll with those niggardly errors, baby

 

[skimom2]

No review is complete without saying something about how you spent your summer vacation. Or if you're a Goodreads member, post a pile of moving pictures that bear no relation to story, but people like that stuff and the reviewer picks up a train. So many reviews talk with pictures there at Goodreads. There too, you can find reviews that run the gamut...take any story you enjoy...look at the reviews there...and you find everything under the sun.

If someone...or my self...makes a claim about any story, I prefer the reviewer be subject to the same law applied to the writer. Show us, don't tell us.

Reviews that claim something fashionable...misogynist...or racist...without telling me why the reviewer has made that claim is so much clanging cymbals. Noise. Nothing more nothing less.

Reviews that ask a question about a detail in the story are good.

One thing I've done with stories is to create an index. Stories don't come with one and my indexing is related more to my own failing as a reader. It has always taken me some time to "get it" and indexing helps me get it. That and reading the story five times. Oh...okay...now I get it. Others can read a story once and they're waiting there at the station for me...I come lolly-gagging in, tongue hanging out, damp...and everyone is already boarding the next train to leave the station. I'm left looking at the graffiti and posters on the wall.

But with indexing, it is curious to look at one story's index and compare/contrast that to another story's index. Minor characters fascinate me. We hear so much about the world's population...so it seems like that should be reflected in story. Reminded of a story I read, character in Chicago...and I'd been in some of the same places, but the story did not bring back that Chicago to me, not the one I saw. Too, cultural...thingies...indexing them. King's stories generate indexes 12 pages long...nothing but character names, cultural thingies (music, books, the rich and filthy, the famous and infamous)...and there could be 3-4 pages of minor characters. The gum-chewing waitress with shoulders like Sunny Liston. And I've discovered that other writers whose stories generate long indexes are the kind of stories I like to read.

Places, too, index them. If a writer says "they entered the restaurant"...I make a note: restaurant. Ready to turn the channel yet? Say like with King...and other "good" story-tellers, we don't get "restaurant"...we get something better. Needful Things. But in the end, my indexes only mean something to me and I don't get funding to adjudicate hybridity, theorize diaspora...but there's drywall that needs mudding and in the end that is more gratifying. And so it goes.

I despise Goodreads so, so much.

I do take notes for a book I am reviewing, and mark relevant quotes (I, too, want to see concrete examples when a reviewer criticises or praises), but I've never done it for a book I'm reading purely for pleasure. I'm intrigued, Walt!

 

[skimom2]

LOL! That's my job, so I don't do so much here I can say that structure and language almost always come into my reviews, and anachronisms get dinged (gently--lol). I'm not nitpicky, though; no 'glocks don't have safeties' or 'that particular model of car had TWO doors, not four' from me, unless it's a vital plot point. I roll with those niggardly errors, baby

...or the book is supposed to be historically accurate--serious history or historical fiction. (Sorry--realized I left that out, and the time to edit my original post had passed )

 

[Walter Oobleck]

I despise Goodreads so, so much.

I do take notes for a book I am reviewing, and mark relevant quotes (I, too, want to see concrete examples when a reviewer criticises or praises), but I've never done it for a book I'm reading purely for pleasure. I'm intrigued, Walt!

Goodreads has its merits. Playing the trivia game I've come across some good stories. Boris Akunin, for one, one that I remember...The Winter Queen...in which he seems to be parodying Dosty among others. One friend there reads some great sci-fi, adds some good reviews, a plus. Another reads some heavy hitters, another plus, more to read. I'd have liked to have had a Goodreads in the Long Ago when I visited the library all the time but didn't know who or what to read. But I've discovered that it doesn't matter how much I enjoy a story, odds are better than even I'll read a review that trashes the story...so all in all...I don't put much stock in the best-selling reviews there. I do look at "recent" reviews rather than what everyone "likes". And it's a nice place to keep track of what I've read...store my indexes there. Heh! Until they disappear!

 

[GNTLGNT]

Very important to remember that average attention span. Social media is a demanding mistress, and people have convinced themselves that they simply don't have any time to . . . you know . . . read stuff.

If you believe some of the research, most people won't even "click" a video that's longer than a minute or two.

I combat this strategy by taking points one at a time. Pick out whatever grabs you the quickest or the strongest, and talk about that. Folks will either respond or they won't (and you can rest assured the thread will never go the way you want it to), but if you don't get any bites, just move on to the next thing you want to talk about.

Whatever happens, if you have strong opinions about specific things and you want to banter, I know at least one guy who will respond to that every time.

If you just liked it and thought it was good . . . that's okay, too . . . but it's not much of a jumping-off point for a discussion.

....Banterer present and accounted for SIR!.....

 

[Leif]

I like the note taking idea and I like the no rambling part. No one will read that stuff but sometimes, like talking where we like to hear our self talk..... we like to see what we've typed....

Leif

 

[muskrat]

Not sure what makes a good review, but I know how to write a bad one. First, let's forget the work in question and discuss the author's personal life. Hmm...Uncle Stevie used to drink and do a lot of coke--well, how can we take him seriously? Second, let's take him to task for his use of 'black' dialogue--he isn't black, so how can he write a black character? That's racist. Wait--he never writes about Hispanics...well, that's racist, too. Why, he sure does write about bad things happening to women--misogyny right there. Golly, he's just a rich, white male! How dare he? But, anyway, I only read the book because our professor assigned it to us. One star. (wish I could give none).

 

[skimom2]

Not sure what makes a good review, but I know how to write a bad one. First, let's forget the work in question and discuss the author's personal life. Hmm...Uncle Stevie used to drink and do a lot of coke--well, how can we take him seriously? Second, let's take him to task for his use of 'black' dialogue--he isn't black, so how can he write a black character? That's racist. Wait--he never writes about Hispanics...well, that's racist, too. Why, he sure does write about bad things happening to women--misogyny right there. Golly, he's just a rich, white male! How dare he? But, anyway, I only read the book because our professor assigned it to us. One star. (wish I could give none).

Or be a reviewer who obviously hasn't read the book. Any time they talk about the author or general themes more than the actual story, they're faking it. I'm still pissed about a review of Doctor Sleep (positive, but still) that said nothing about the book but what could be had on the book jacket. The reviewer was famous, but if he/she wasn't going to read the damn book, she/he shouldn't have written a review.

 

[Kurben]

Or be a reviewer who obviously hasn't read the book. Any time they talk about the author or general themes more than the actual story, they're faking it. I'm still pissed about a review of Doctor Sleep (positive, but still) that said nothing about the book but what could be had on the book jacket. The reviewer was famous, but if he/she wasn't going to read the damn book, she/he shouldn't have written a review.

Thats not uncommon, sadly......