And then there's the whole rating of books thing. Some writers don't want to rate books, others have no issues writing lengthy reviews. I'm kind of in the middle. I will rate them, but I'm not writing reviews anymore since they feel like mini book reports, which feels too much like school. While I liked school, a book report is just me spewing made-up crap at other people. I'd much rather have a conversation about a book. Way more interesting.
I wish I could assign two ratings to a book. One for the reader in me, and one for the writer. I guess I'm a little two-faced.
A while back I finished reading a highly regarded book I didn't enjoy. I thought it was well done, which is why I finished it. The book gave me the heebie jeebies. I was really disturbed and slightly revolted by the content, but I was still rooting for the characters. When it was time to rate the book, I couldn't do it.
As a writer, I appreciate the originality, voice and writing chops it took to write it. I admire the author's willingness to push through some tough content and "go there." But my reader side wants to tell everyone she knows NOT to read this book. She wants to un-read the book and pretend it never happened. I object to almost everything about it.
Maybe my strong reaction to the book is reason enough for me to give it a high star rating on Goodreads. After all, a strong reaction means the writing was good right? It's not like I didn't care about the protagonists. Maybe that's the reason it's highly rated by others.
I look at my ratings like an endorsement of the book, and I feel awkward rating a book highly when I would never in a million years tell anyone to read it - even if I appreciated the way the author did it from a more analytical point of view.
Do you rate books on Goodreads? Do your reader and writer selves butt heads over what a book should be rated? Should I stop thinking so much? (It wouldn't be the first time I've heard that).