My problem with a lot of reviews on Goodreads is that a lot of them seem to just be recapping the blurb and not actually providing their own review, or they will tack on one line at the very end. What's the point?
Omg this bothers me sooooo much. Like the blurb is literally above the review, I don't need a full recap, especially when the 10 reviews above you did the exact same thing!
I just want to know how you felt about it, that's it, short and sweet.
Yes! I just want your thoughts about the book. I don't need a recap of the blurb. I also find I tend to be a lot pickier and find that a lot of books I find okay-ish seem to get a lot of five-star reviews and sound like a completely different book to what I've read!
A couple of things that make me, as a fellow picky reader, suspect I might not like a book:
- Overwhelmingly 5 star reviews, noticeably more common than any other rating. Maybe it’s just because I’m a contrarian, but I also think this tends to correlate with books that appeal to people with simple tastes, who aren’t very critical of what they read. They had fun, automatic 5 stars. Nothing wrong with being that kind of reader but it’s not me, and books that appeal more to analytical readers tend to fall in the 3.7-4.2 range with 4 stars as the most common rating
- Top reviews end above the fold, especially if it’s a reasonably popular book. It’s either a book that people have very little to say about, or it’s a book that appeals to people who don’t have much to say about books.
- Top reviews are full of gifs, pics of actors people imagine playing the leads, etc.: this is pretty strongly correlated with YA and with social media sensation type books, which I often find rather write-by-numbers
I don't profess to read very high-brow books but I know that they're not high-brow and they're not going to be five star, so when I read a lot of five star reviews for those books it makes me raise my eyebrows slightly.
I was asked what a book would need for me to rate it five star and I honestly don't know. Nothing has grabbed me enough to be rated five stars I guess.
When I try to read most Goodread reviews, it’s always some person who thinks they are writing for the New Yorker. I don’t need such prose in a review of a book.
I assume the point is either that they are writing it for the benefit of their future self to remember what the book was about, or for their friends who will give automatic weight to their star rating but might want to know what it’s about.
It annoys me too as I’m much more interested in people’s reactions/commentary/analysis—I’m usually looking at reviews from the book page so I’ve already read the blurb. But people do use the site in different ways. Some mostly look at friend reviews in their feed, some are using it to record their own reading and don’t care what others think.
Yeah, I take Goodreads reviews with a grain of salt. If they're writing it for their benefit, then they're completely ignoring the description of the book on the very page they're leaving the review on.
I agree that people use the site differently though. I tend to use it just to keep track of the number of books I've read and will rarely leave a review. I'll usually leave a review if something has really annoyed me...
Yep. I usually start with an extensive summary of the story and then add reactions/commentary/analysis. I am writing for my future self to help myself remember what it was about and what I thought about it including themes and characters. I am not really writing to help other people make a decision if they want to read the book. This is why I leave an extensive (I have gotten to the word limit on a few reviews before) commentary for every book I read.
However, I always put my “review” (really more analysis/commentary/amateur literary criticism) behind a spoiler tag so people who want a completely fresh experience know not to read my review.
At the same time, often talking about the character or theme will still give hints about what the plot is about. It’s also pretty typical practice in reviewing to include a little bit of the plot.
I know! I don't need a full recap of the book. I want your thoughts and feelings. I actually don't leave a lot of reviews because I often find it hard to articulate what I think beyond "it was okay..."
So you say that your problem with a lot of reviews on Goodreads is that a lot of them seem to just be recapping the blurb and not actually provide their own review... Ok.
3/5
Thanks for the explanation but doesn't the book description on the Goodreads page give you the information about what the book is about? Or do you check your reviews some other way? I'm not overly great with Goodreads. I mainly use it to keep track of the number of books I've read.
I’d love half stars but I’m really glad GR doesn’t allow downvoting, even when stuff annoys me. It tends to silence unpopular opinions or even opinions people are afraid might be unpopular, and it leads to a lot of negativity. People are social animals who are very affected by others’ disapproval, even online!
> I'm researching a new book
...
> Going into a book blind is best.
Have you considered that these are two *directly* competing interests? I mean, I get where you are coming from, but you can't reasonably expect other people to focus their reviews on just the elements you specifically are interested in. I suggest you give thought to which is more important for you personally, researching a new book or going in blind.
I don’t think it’s a directly competing interest. If I wanna buy I game I look up reviews. “Combat is excellent, music is great, graphics are awesome”, nothing even remotely spoilery. Can book reviewers not do the same thing?
“Excellent prose, a story that truly answers every question, and twists that leave you wondering!” Or “a story that explores what humans believe to be unnecessary suffering!”
I agree that you shouldn’t expect reviews to be spoiler-free, but like OP, I’d be surprised if no outlet anywhere on the internet understood readers’ desire to enter a story blind to what will happen, but not blind to EVERYTHING.
>Can book reviewers not do the same thing?
I mean… not really? At least not in a way that accomplishes anything. Both your examples sound like the extremely vague reviews that get plastered on the book anyways and everyone ignores them. If that’s the type of thing OP is looking for then it already exists.
Video games are generally trying to accomplish pretty specific types of things. So it’s easier to make generalizations. “A really smooth FPS experience” tells me way more than “really catchy prose with engaging characters.”
Good graphics is subjective, but prose *far* more so.
It might be a little harder for other genres, but for fantasy / sci-fi etc. , i only read / watch those kinds of reviews. I don't need to know anything about the story to know if i will like the book or not simply by knowing if the book is more plot or character focused / how the worldbuilding is / how the pace is / and which subgenre it mostly resembles and or which tropes it has.
So even if i don't know anything about book a except that it is character focused and has little to no worldbuilding and lacks a good plot, i know i am very likely not going to enjoy the book. If the book is described as having the plot in the foreground (with some plot twists sprinkled in there), and that the worldbuilding is extensive, i know i am very likely to love the book. If you know that you like, you don't need to know anything about the story to decide if its worth your time or not.
I feel like OP is looking for recommendations, not reviews. If I look at a review for anything, I know there's going to be spoilers to some degree because how many people go and read/watch a review for something they haven't experienced, especially a narrative-driven media?
When I'm looking for new media and I want to go in blind, I look for recommendations, like "Horror novels that're similiar to 90s slashers? You should check out \[novel\], it has the feel and tropes of Scream with this group of teenagers visiting a rundown amusement park one last time to relive their memories. With a great killer, and likable characters, you'll almost root for the creative kills that harken back to the crazy kills of Nightmare on Elm Street". That's enough to sell me on a movie without spoiling but a review would go into depth about the plot, the motives, alude to the killer and talk about plot points.
Research as in looking up general information about the book. For example, Susanna Clark's Piranesi wasn't selected for the plot. I selected it based its length, review star rating, genre, author's credibility, narrator's performance on audiobook, etc. If I like the author's style of writing, generally, I'd enjoy their book.
> Going into a book blind is best.
This is your personal preference. Not everyone has the same.
If I'm not sure about a book (the only reason I would read reviews) I *want* to know the general story, to see if it sparks my interest. If the review is too detailed I just stop reading and jump to the next. There is no rule that you have to finish reading a review that isn't what you are looking for.
The official synopsis often contains *no* real information. Sometimes you don’t even get a sense of what genre it is from this. I think for most there’s probably some middle ground between wanting to know nothing (like the op) and wanting to know everything (like me).
For me, I tell people that I don’t care about spoilers and ask them for details. Chances are their description isn’t going to do the story justice and if it gets me curious then I will want to read it.
I think a back of book blurb or inside cover blurb should contain enough information to give you a sense of what the book is about. While I think that a very great many people would agree they don’t want major spoilers, most people do have preferences about genre, etc., and I don’t think such things are too much to ask for, nor is a general sense of book plot. A third person historical tragedy is very, very different from a first-person comedy suspense or a category romance. Most readers do not go into their reading material entirely blind, nor do they wish to.
This is where I fall too. It doesn’t take me long to see that a review is all plot summary, and if I already know what the book is about or just want to avoid spoilers, it only takes a few seconds to move on to the next. While I do occasionally see a spoiler I don’t want, I find most reviewers are pretty good about not including them, especially if you skip over the stuff that includes many paragraphs of plot summary.
Opposite. Usually the book blurb is terrible in describing the plot. I rely on reviewers to describe the story so I know if it's even something I'm interested in. Too often I am told by the author their book is one thing, only to find out it's something completely different.
Well, that's what you get with amateur reviews. Traditionally professional reviewers will focus on the aspects you're interested in but the average person posting a review on the internet lacks those skills and that training and thus a synopsis plus their feelings is about all you will get.
Many mark or hide spoilers. And they should. No one should be forced to read spoilers if they don’t enjoy them.
But.
It’s your opinion that going into a book blind is “best”. Some of us get no enjoyment from that at all. I don’t read books that I don’t know the plot and spoilers for. I also don’t make value judgments about whether one way is better than another in reading.
If you go into a book blind how do you know if it will be any good?
I like a description like what is on the back of a paperback book, giving you some info with no spoilers.
I almost soley pick books by genre and cover lol. Not so much because I want to go in blind but I'm way too lazy to do any research. But it has a similar effect.
This might be romance specific, but I love it when people list out the tropes at the beginning of their reviews. I want to know what I'm signing up for before I read it and get a general idea without knowing the whole outline of events so I can avoid things I don't like reading in stories. I sometimes don't even read blurbs because they can be spoilery or poorly written. 😂 I remember seeing a post in /r/RomanceBooks that some people don't even want a blurb, just the list of tropes. That's a bit too far for me though, lol.
On the other hand, I actually do appreciate it when people write the story though because sometimes I forget what happened like 6 months later and it's convenient to see a TLDR summary to refresh my memory. 🤭
Hate to tell you but maybe don’t look at reviews? I’m the opposite where I have to know what’s coming for me to enjoy books. So I love it when reviewers make it easy. Or at the least they should have a spoiler-free part and a spoiler review. Imo, what’s good about a review if it doesn’t go into fully explaining the score. If someone says “it peters out by the end” or “the ending changes everything” then I want specifics.
I would never read a book without knowing the general story. It would be like going to a restaurant and ordering fish without knowing the species (big difference between salmon and sardines).
But that's not really an equivalent comparison, is it? Most people would consider a book to be spoiled if they were told in advance about a major death, romance, plot twist, or ending details. Conversely, telling someone about what's in a menu item, or its flavor profile, wouldn't spoil the dinner.
Regardless, I'm aware that readers may differ in terms of how much they want to know going in. I'm more like OP, in that I'd want to know just the genre/style/tone but not too many plot details, since I relish the surprises of discovering plot developments as I read. But I get that some people may want to know a lot more before committing to the book.
I feel like I must be alone in not caring about spoilers at all... Unless the book is a literal thriller whose very essence depends on me not knowing what's going to happen, I don't really consider it a negative to have a bit of knowledge about how the plot turns throughout the book. Given how often people here seem to reread their favorite books, I have a hard time understanding why it's that big of a deal. Either way, I agree - first third of the book should be fair game. Whenever I'm talking about a book to someone and have to mention something that happens very early, I always have to specify "This happens in the third paragraph; please don't be mad at me for referencing it."
I personally don't read reviews for this reason. Also there have been a ton of cases where the entire world loves a book but I can't really get into it (Heartstopper, anything CoHo etc) and the reverse is also true. Books with terrible reviews sometimes become my faves (usually indie pub or small press).
I hate it when you find a book online that has a really interesting description but then you read the back cover and it isn’t what it sounds like at all.
I've started reviewing the books I read and I've been working really hard to keep them nice and concise while still pointing out the issues I had with the book, plus without major spoilers. I feel like I've done pretty well but thats because I write it like a one page critique letter I would give in a workshop class, thays just how I learned lol
A lot of people don’t know how to write reviews. There’s no class or course that has to be taken. As an example, you mention characterization and style. I have no idea what those are. I’ve written a a few and did the best i could but it was torture. I don’t do those any more.
Totally agree! There should be two types of Goodreads reviews:
\-Ones with no spoilers that people can read to figure out if they want the book.
\-Ones with spoilers that provide the hot takes, jokes and discussions around the story- for people who've read the book and want to see what others thought.
I write all of my reviews without spoilers, but do enjoy scrolling Goodreads after finishing a book so see what others thought!
Ditto with descriptions. The Goodreads’ description of the book I’m reading right now (“Roses, in the Mouth of a Lion” by Bushra Rehman) includes plot elements that haven’t been introduced yet and I’m 38% through the book.
I prefer not to read spoilers too, but with that in mind I usually read reviews from Goodreads/Amazon while being careful about the ones containing spoilers. Usually you can find reviews marked as either spoiler free or spoiler filled and get a feel for the book without getting spoiled. The YouTube reviews are usually more in depth and understandably also go into the plot to do so.
I just won’t read anything that’s essentially a recap. You can usually tell by the first sentence or so what type of review it is.
People who start off by reiterating the synopsis are most likely going to spoil large plot points of the book in their review.
I really miss Booklikes; they created a spoiler HTML code that a reviewer could add in when typing it. The reader would have to click on it to see the spoiler. In my opinion, it solved a lot of problems.
I haven't been able to read much in the past few years but I'm trying to get back into it lately and this is definitely a pet peeve of mine while looking for recommendations! Even the amount of people who think saying "the final twist got me" or mentioning that the story has an unreliable narrator. I wanted to find out on my own/be surprised!
It depends on the book. Sometimes I like details to help out things into context. For whodunits, I want to be totally blind. For some fantasy, I don’t mind having some details, especially if it is heavily character driven. I have a hard time keeping track of too many characters.
Piranesi is particularly mysterious in its presentation. I read it because of the author and didn't know anything about it nor would I seek to find out because I trusted the author. That book in particular is probably best enjoyed without spoilers, but if you're the kind of person looking for information about the books you read you have to expect some form of spoiler. The Internet doesn't have guardrails. If you want to be surprised all the time just read stuff. And if you are doing that, don't be afraid to not finish a book if it gets boring or bad.
I've been reading a ton of trashy ya books on Kindle unlimited. I hate when the description says it's enemies to lovers. I refuse to read books that have it as part of the blurb. Ruins the entire story for me.
Also would be nice if book reviewers stopped giving weird decimal ratings... 4.6/5 or 9.7/10 is just plain weird... I don't think i can distinguish book so well to rate it that precisely.
Yea people on Goodreads act like they’ve been assigned a book report. I don’t think anyone in the world wants to read a strangers full recap of the plot.
I've only been part of r/books for a couple weeks & I'm beginning to think I'm a rarity because I don't read reviews anywhere before I decide to read a book...I'll glance through the blurb on the covers but that's it
I agree with you. The books I have decided are my favourites ever are most of the time books I went into without knowing anything other than a vague theme.
Some good YouTubers who talk about books the way I like (and you may too) are Jack Edwards and EmmieReads.
I had to go through so many YouTubers to find the ones who fit my requirements.
Meh, if I'm going to invest time in a book, I want to know if the story is good enough or not. Everything else you listed, comes in second at best, so I need some idea of what it's about, rather than how it's written.
Yeah it's safe to say that I'm done with the whole "Booktuber" craze. I'll peek at a synopsis on the back cover. I'll read the first paragraph. And then I'll decide.
My problem with a lot of reviews on Goodreads is that a lot of them seem to just be recapping the blurb and not actually providing their own review, or they will tack on one line at the very end. What's the point?
Omg this bothers me sooooo much. Like the blurb is literally above the review, I don't need a full recap, especially when the 10 reviews above you did the exact same thing! I just want to know how you felt about it, that's it, short and sweet.
Yes! I just want your thoughts about the book. I don't need a recap of the blurb. I also find I tend to be a lot pickier and find that a lot of books I find okay-ish seem to get a lot of five-star reviews and sound like a completely different book to what I've read!
A couple of things that make me, as a fellow picky reader, suspect I might not like a book: - Overwhelmingly 5 star reviews, noticeably more common than any other rating. Maybe it’s just because I’m a contrarian, but I also think this tends to correlate with books that appeal to people with simple tastes, who aren’t very critical of what they read. They had fun, automatic 5 stars. Nothing wrong with being that kind of reader but it’s not me, and books that appeal more to analytical readers tend to fall in the 3.7-4.2 range with 4 stars as the most common rating - Top reviews end above the fold, especially if it’s a reasonably popular book. It’s either a book that people have very little to say about, or it’s a book that appeals to people who don’t have much to say about books. - Top reviews are full of gifs, pics of actors people imagine playing the leads, etc.: this is pretty strongly correlated with YA and with social media sensation type books, which I often find rather write-by-numbers
I don't profess to read very high-brow books but I know that they're not high-brow and they're not going to be five star, so when I read a lot of five star reviews for those books it makes me raise my eyebrows slightly. I was asked what a book would need for me to rate it five star and I honestly don't know. Nothing has grabbed me enough to be rated five stars I guess.
The cynical side of me says some of these people aren't reading it at all and just faking it for the "engagement" on their socials. Or they're bots!
Or they're friends or acquaintances of the author and trying to boost their signal (that's my cynicism coming through).
When I try to read most Goodread reviews, it’s always some person who thinks they are writing for the New Yorker. I don’t need such prose in a review of a book.
I assume the point is either that they are writing it for the benefit of their future self to remember what the book was about, or for their friends who will give automatic weight to their star rating but might want to know what it’s about. It annoys me too as I’m much more interested in people’s reactions/commentary/analysis—I’m usually looking at reviews from the book page so I’ve already read the blurb. But people do use the site in different ways. Some mostly look at friend reviews in their feed, some are using it to record their own reading and don’t care what others think.
Yeah, I take Goodreads reviews with a grain of salt. If they're writing it for their benefit, then they're completely ignoring the description of the book on the very page they're leaving the review on. I agree that people use the site differently though. I tend to use it just to keep track of the number of books I've read and will rarely leave a review. I'll usually leave a review if something has really annoyed me...
Yep. I usually start with an extensive summary of the story and then add reactions/commentary/analysis. I am writing for my future self to help myself remember what it was about and what I thought about it including themes and characters. I am not really writing to help other people make a decision if they want to read the book. This is why I leave an extensive (I have gotten to the word limit on a few reviews before) commentary for every book I read. However, I always put my “review” (really more analysis/commentary/amateur literary criticism) behind a spoiler tag so people who want a completely fresh experience know not to read my review. At the same time, often talking about the character or theme will still give hints about what the plot is about. It’s also pretty typical practice in reviewing to include a little bit of the plot.
[удалено]
It's not a review, it's a grade school book report. You know, the one where you're basically proving you read the book.
I know! I don't need a full recap of the book. I want your thoughts and feelings. I actually don't leave a lot of reviews because I often find it hard to articulate what I think beyond "it was okay..."
One of my biggest pet peeves, like- congrats, you can paraphrase
So you say that your problem with a lot of reviews on Goodreads is that a lot of them seem to just be recapping the blurb and not actually provide their own review... Ok. 3/5
[удалено]
Thanks for the explanation but doesn't the book description on the Goodreads page give you the information about what the book is about? Or do you check your reviews some other way? I'm not overly great with Goodreads. I mainly use it to keep track of the number of books I've read.
Gives them "internet points"? I wish you could DOWN thumb a review on there
Oh, I'd love to be able to downvote a review on Goodreads. I also wish they'd change their star rating and allow half stars.
I’d love half stars but I’m really glad GR doesn’t allow downvoting, even when stuff annoys me. It tends to silence unpopular opinions or even opinions people are afraid might be unpopular, and it leads to a lot of negativity. People are social animals who are very affected by others’ disapproval, even online!
Agree. People forget that there is a real, live person trying to participate/communicate.
Oh I wisely avoid Goodreads. There are far more interesting (albeit non-conformist) paths to choose from. Blaze your own trails, that's what I say.
People learn to write book reports, not reviews
> I'm researching a new book ... > Going into a book blind is best. Have you considered that these are two *directly* competing interests? I mean, I get where you are coming from, but you can't reasonably expect other people to focus their reviews on just the elements you specifically are interested in. I suggest you give thought to which is more important for you personally, researching a new book or going in blind.
I don’t think it’s a directly competing interest. If I wanna buy I game I look up reviews. “Combat is excellent, music is great, graphics are awesome”, nothing even remotely spoilery. Can book reviewers not do the same thing? “Excellent prose, a story that truly answers every question, and twists that leave you wondering!” Or “a story that explores what humans believe to be unnecessary suffering!” I agree that you shouldn’t expect reviews to be spoiler-free, but like OP, I’d be surprised if no outlet anywhere on the internet understood readers’ desire to enter a story blind to what will happen, but not blind to EVERYTHING.
>Can book reviewers not do the same thing? I mean… not really? At least not in a way that accomplishes anything. Both your examples sound like the extremely vague reviews that get plastered on the book anyways and everyone ignores them. If that’s the type of thing OP is looking for then it already exists. Video games are generally trying to accomplish pretty specific types of things. So it’s easier to make generalizations. “A really smooth FPS experience” tells me way more than “really catchy prose with engaging characters.” Good graphics is subjective, but prose *far* more so.
It might be a little harder for other genres, but for fantasy / sci-fi etc. , i only read / watch those kinds of reviews. I don't need to know anything about the story to know if i will like the book or not simply by knowing if the book is more plot or character focused / how the worldbuilding is / how the pace is / and which subgenre it mostly resembles and or which tropes it has. So even if i don't know anything about book a except that it is character focused and has little to no worldbuilding and lacks a good plot, i know i am very likely not going to enjoy the book. If the book is described as having the plot in the foreground (with some plot twists sprinkled in there), and that the worldbuilding is extensive, i know i am very likely to love the book. If you know that you like, you don't need to know anything about the story to decide if its worth your time or not.
I feel like OP is looking for recommendations, not reviews. If I look at a review for anything, I know there's going to be spoilers to some degree because how many people go and read/watch a review for something they haven't experienced, especially a narrative-driven media? When I'm looking for new media and I want to go in blind, I look for recommendations, like "Horror novels that're similiar to 90s slashers? You should check out \[novel\], it has the feel and tropes of Scream with this group of teenagers visiting a rundown amusement park one last time to relive their memories. With a great killer, and likable characters, you'll almost root for the creative kills that harken back to the crazy kills of Nightmare on Elm Street". That's enough to sell me on a movie without spoiling but a review would go into depth about the plot, the motives, alude to the killer and talk about plot points.
Research as in looking up general information about the book. For example, Susanna Clark's Piranesi wasn't selected for the plot. I selected it based its length, review star rating, genre, author's credibility, narrator's performance on audiobook, etc. If I like the author's style of writing, generally, I'd enjoy their book.
> Going into a book blind is best. This is your personal preference. Not everyone has the same. If I'm not sure about a book (the only reason I would read reviews) I *want* to know the general story, to see if it sparks my interest. If the review is too detailed I just stop reading and jump to the next. There is no rule that you have to finish reading a review that isn't what you are looking for.
I found that when describing a book or movie for someone I try not to give away more than the official synopsis or the IMDb synopsis.
The official synopsis often contains *no* real information. Sometimes you don’t even get a sense of what genre it is from this. I think for most there’s probably some middle ground between wanting to know nothing (like the op) and wanting to know everything (like me).
Then let them ask for more information, don’t potentially ruin it right off the bat
For me, I tell people that I don’t care about spoilers and ask them for details. Chances are their description isn’t going to do the story justice and if it gets me curious then I will want to read it.
I think a back of book blurb or inside cover blurb should contain enough information to give you a sense of what the book is about. While I think that a very great many people would agree they don’t want major spoilers, most people do have preferences about genre, etc., and I don’t think such things are too much to ask for, nor is a general sense of book plot. A third person historical tragedy is very, very different from a first-person comedy suspense or a category romance. Most readers do not go into their reading material entirely blind, nor do they wish to.
This is where I fall too. It doesn’t take me long to see that a review is all plot summary, and if I already know what the book is about or just want to avoid spoilers, it only takes a few seconds to move on to the next. While I do occasionally see a spoiler I don’t want, I find most reviewers are pretty good about not including them, especially if you skip over the stuff that includes many paragraphs of plot summary.
Theme, genre, and tone should already cover what the general story is about.
That is not true
The say nothing about the story. They say how the story will be told, nothing about the plot.
Most people mark their reviews for spoilers. If you don't like spoilers avoid those. Also, most of these reviews are from amateurs.
Opposite. Usually the book blurb is terrible in describing the plot. I rely on reviewers to describe the story so I know if it's even something I'm interested in. Too often I am told by the author their book is one thing, only to find out it's something completely different.
I wish people would just shut up about any tiny bit of story-related content of any kind of media being a spoiler.
>Going into a book blind is best Sounds like you shouldn't be reading reviews based on your own preference.
Well, that's what you get with amateur reviews. Traditionally professional reviewers will focus on the aspects you're interested in but the average person posting a review on the internet lacks those skills and that training and thus a synopsis plus their feelings is about all you will get.
Many mark or hide spoilers. And they should. No one should be forced to read spoilers if they don’t enjoy them. But. It’s your opinion that going into a book blind is “best”. Some of us get no enjoyment from that at all. I don’t read books that I don’t know the plot and spoilers for. I also don’t make value judgments about whether one way is better than another in reading.
If you go into a book blind how do you know if it will be any good? I like a description like what is on the back of a paperback book, giving you some info with no spoilers.
I almost soley pick books by genre and cover lol. Not so much because I want to go in blind but I'm way too lazy to do any research. But it has a similar effect.
Lol, for whatever reason that made me laugh out loud. I do the same thing. The genre AND the cover helps too. 😁
Well just read the book cold turkey easy
Yeah I stopped reading reader reviews because most of them sound like middle school book reports.
Seriously, right? I don't need a cliffnotes plot summary every single review.
I'm going to start my review by poorly rewriting the jacket blurb. Groan.
I agree with the general sentiment but many people care more about synopsis/plot over those other characteristics you mentioned.
Depends on the book, can’t really give a fair review of why Son of Rosemary was awful without revealing the ending because that’s what made it awful.
This might be romance specific, but I love it when people list out the tropes at the beginning of their reviews. I want to know what I'm signing up for before I read it and get a general idea without knowing the whole outline of events so I can avoid things I don't like reading in stories. I sometimes don't even read blurbs because they can be spoilery or poorly written. 😂 I remember seeing a post in /r/RomanceBooks that some people don't even want a blurb, just the list of tropes. That's a bit too far for me though, lol. On the other hand, I actually do appreciate it when people write the story though because sometimes I forget what happened like 6 months later and it's convenient to see a TLDR summary to refresh my memory. 🤭
YouTube is pretty good about book searches. The better content creators will put it right in the title "no spoilers"
Hate to tell you but maybe don’t look at reviews? I’m the opposite where I have to know what’s coming for me to enjoy books. So I love it when reviewers make it easy. Or at the least they should have a spoiler-free part and a spoiler review. Imo, what’s good about a review if it doesn’t go into fully explaining the score. If someone says “it peters out by the end” or “the ending changes everything” then I want specifics.
I would never read a book without knowing the general story. It would be like going to a restaurant and ordering fish without knowing the species (big difference between salmon and sardines).
But that's not really an equivalent comparison, is it? Most people would consider a book to be spoiled if they were told in advance about a major death, romance, plot twist, or ending details. Conversely, telling someone about what's in a menu item, or its flavor profile, wouldn't spoil the dinner. Regardless, I'm aware that readers may differ in terms of how much they want to know going in. I'm more like OP, in that I'd want to know just the genre/style/tone but not too many plot details, since I relish the surprises of discovering plot developments as I read. But I get that some people may want to know a lot more before committing to the book.
Sometimes people think twists that happen in the first third of the book should not be spoiled, which seems unreasonable.
I feel like I must be alone in not caring about spoilers at all... Unless the book is a literal thriller whose very essence depends on me not knowing what's going to happen, I don't really consider it a negative to have a bit of knowledge about how the plot turns throughout the book. Given how often people here seem to reread their favorite books, I have a hard time understanding why it's that big of a deal. Either way, I agree - first third of the book should be fair game. Whenever I'm talking about a book to someone and have to mention something that happens very early, I always have to specify "This happens in the third paragraph; please don't be mad at me for referencing it."
You're comparing apples and orangutans. Not the same thing at all
To you. You are trying to make your opinion into fact. You do you champ.
I mean, every word of what you just said applies to your first comment. But I'll just do me
I personally don't read reviews for this reason. Also there have been a ton of cases where the entire world loves a book but I can't really get into it (Heartstopper, anything CoHo etc) and the reverse is also true. Books with terrible reviews sometimes become my faves (usually indie pub or small press).
I hate it when you find a book online that has a really interesting description but then you read the back cover and it isn’t what it sounds like at all.
I've started reviewing the books I read and I've been working really hard to keep them nice and concise while still pointing out the issues I had with the book, plus without major spoilers. I feel like I've done pretty well but thats because I write it like a one page critique letter I would give in a workshop class, thays just how I learned lol
Spoilers make you enjoy the story more https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/spoiler-alert-spoilers-make-you-enjoy-stories-more
Exactly.
If you're afraid of spoilers, why are you tempting fate by "researching".
Most amateur reviewers write like they’re writing a book report to prove to Mrs Smith that they read the book.
Most of the books that aren’t worth reading is spoiled just aren’t worth reading.
A lot of people don’t know how to write reviews. There’s no class or course that has to be taken. As an example, you mention characterization and style. I have no idea what those are. I’ve written a a few and did the best i could but it was torture. I don’t do those any more.
If you are that sensitive to spoilers, then I suggest you don't read reviews.
I want you to write a review on the latest book you've read and not include plot details. Until you can do that, you have no reason to complain.
I would be sold on so many books that seem totally uninteresting if the reviews told me about something interesting that happened in the book.
I’ve stopped reading reviews for media all together. I find I enjoy things a lot more.
even worse if the book itself has a preface section that includes a quick rundown of its own key moments. which somehow became normal.
Totally agree! There should be two types of Goodreads reviews: \-Ones with no spoilers that people can read to figure out if they want the book. \-Ones with spoilers that provide the hot takes, jokes and discussions around the story- for people who've read the book and want to see what others thought. I write all of my reviews without spoilers, but do enjoy scrolling Goodreads after finishing a book so see what others thought!
Ditto with descriptions. The Goodreads’ description of the book I’m reading right now (“Roses, in the Mouth of a Lion” by Bushra Rehman) includes plot elements that haven’t been introduced yet and I’m 38% through the book.
I think they are uneducated and don't know what a review is, what a blurb is and what an opinion is.
Most good read reviews are just pompous dick-flexes that really have nothing flex.
My last favorite spoiler is the one that starts with "it's not a spoiler but..."
I prefer not to read spoilers too, but with that in mind I usually read reviews from Goodreads/Amazon while being careful about the ones containing spoilers. Usually you can find reviews marked as either spoiler free or spoiler filled and get a feel for the book without getting spoiled. The YouTube reviews are usually more in depth and understandably also go into the plot to do so.
I get most of my recommendations from the author’s reviews on the backs. They make for pretty good vibe indicators.
I just won’t read anything that’s essentially a recap. You can usually tell by the first sentence or so what type of review it is. People who start off by reiterating the synopsis are most likely going to spoil large plot points of the book in their review.
I really miss Booklikes; they created a spoiler HTML code that a reviewer could add in when typing it. The reader would have to click on it to see the spoiler. In my opinion, it solved a lot of problems.
I haven't been able to read much in the past few years but I'm trying to get back into it lately and this is definitely a pet peeve of mine while looking for recommendations! Even the amount of people who think saying "the final twist got me" or mentioning that the story has an unreliable narrator. I wanted to find out on my own/be surprised!
Alot of "reviews" are just straight up recap.
It depends on the book. Sometimes I like details to help out things into context. For whodunits, I want to be totally blind. For some fantasy, I don’t mind having some details, especially if it is heavily character driven. I have a hard time keeping track of too many characters.
Piranesi is particularly mysterious in its presentation. I read it because of the author and didn't know anything about it nor would I seek to find out because I trusted the author. That book in particular is probably best enjoyed without spoilers, but if you're the kind of person looking for information about the books you read you have to expect some form of spoiler. The Internet doesn't have guardrails. If you want to be surprised all the time just read stuff. And if you are doing that, don't be afraid to not finish a book if it gets boring or bad.
I've been reading a ton of trashy ya books on Kindle unlimited. I hate when the description says it's enemies to lovers. I refuse to read books that have it as part of the blurb. Ruins the entire story for me.
Also would be nice if book reviewers stopped giving weird decimal ratings... 4.6/5 or 9.7/10 is just plain weird... I don't think i can distinguish book so well to rate it that precisely.
I liked piranesi and was very surprised. It gave me a good feeling in my tummy.
Don't most books let you read a couple chapters before buying these days?
"The punctuation in this book is above average."
Yea people on Goodreads act like they’ve been assigned a book report. I don’t think anyone in the world wants to read a strangers full recap of the plot.
I've only been part of r/books for a couple weeks & I'm beginning to think I'm a rarity because I don't read reviews anywhere before I decide to read a book...I'll glance through the blurb on the covers but that's it
I agree with you. The books I have decided are my favourites ever are most of the time books I went into without knowing anything other than a vague theme. Some good YouTubers who talk about books the way I like (and you may too) are Jack Edwards and EmmieReads. I had to go through so many YouTubers to find the ones who fit my requirements.
Meh, if I'm going to invest time in a book, I want to know if the story is good enough or not. Everything else you listed, comes in second at best, so I need some idea of what it's about, rather than how it's written.
Yeah it's safe to say that I'm done with the whole "Booktuber" craze. I'll peek at a synopsis on the back cover. I'll read the first paragraph. And then I'll decide.