'By the end, it often feels like the review is more about showing how much the reviewer knows rather than telling us if the book at hand is readable, enjoyable, and recommendable.'
YES. I do like Ron Charles reviews in The Washington Post, but NYTimes and the freelance reviews in WaPo leave me cold. Stop showing off and tell me how the book made you *feel*.
In a world where award winning books can sit on a shelf in a bookstore right beside the latest schlock with 100,000 amazon 5 stars, but only because it entertains …and for the same price…. book reviews like yours are immensely helpful.
(You pay more for gifted art and live music, but not the written word? Yet , this poor person is glad of it)
Help me avoid mediocre writing, formulaic stories, hidden propaganda, erotica, and unnecessary foul language. Point out books worthy of second reads or passing on to my teenage grandkids. Those that help the reader empathize with situations reflecting real people they would never meet in their own bubble.
Thought provoking, world building, changed my life kind of books. They are out there hidden among the over published, over promoted, trend of the moment, flash in the pan.
Thanks for helping me sort through the stacks to find them. Keep up the good work!!
For over 10 years I've been writing short 50 to 250 word notes to myself about each book I read. Just as a way to collect my thoughts, sometimes in shorthand, usually in long form. I try to just record what I enjoyed or didn't enjoy about the book so I can circle back to it at the end of the year, or many years later.
I think for other people sharing their reviews I just want brevity and something that exposes their personality and gets to the heart of why they loved/liked/disliked the book. I enjoy snark and wit, but brevity always :).
I've also been thinking about this a lot as I am building a book review format on Shepherd.com, and I want the format to be focused on building a profile of what that reader loves to read so that I can use that to help them find other people who share their Book DNA, and then use that shared DNA to connect them with books they will love.
I want to know how a book made you feel, about what it made you think, what was your experience while reading it, what are your thoughts on the writing, the story, whatever you think is relevant. I don’t need to read the blurb, I can look the book up and read what it is about myself, I want to know what it does to people.
I read reviews for a simple purpose: to determine if the book is worth the investment of my time to read (the true cost of a book isn't the price!). So for me, the review needs to touch on several topics:
-Validate that the publisher's book description (i.e., my initial understanding of the book's topic) is correct, and expand on it as necessary.
-Establish that the reviewer is someone whose opinion I can rely on: truthfulness, knowledge of the genre, clear and grammatical writing, perhaps some personality insights. (This isn't necessary for me in the case of some regular reviewers; for instance, Jeremy's reviews have already proven trustworthy to me.)
-Describe personal reactions to the book, particularly writing structure, theme, character development, pacing, etc. How did the book make the reviewer feel? Did the author have good command of language? Were the characters b8elievable? Did anything stand out, positively or negatively? Was it strictly a pleasure read, or was it enjoyable from the author's use of language, or was it enlightening on a theme or subject?
-Most importantly, did the author consider the book to be a good return on the investment of their time?
Great point about book reviews in big publications! I feel the same way - I dislike reading most reviews from these big names because it seems like 90% of the review is just telling me the entire plot of the story, with just a few lines at the end with their opinion. I often read a review and think "Okay, I have no idea whether I would like this book, but now that I know the whole story I guess I don't need to read it?"
I think this is a big part of why Neha and I hesitate to use the word 'review' in our podcast and newsletter - we are not here to give long summaries of books (there are plenty of places online to find those). We're here to talk about how a book made us feel, what it means, and what it made us think about.
I think one of the biggest things missing in a lot of book reviews is personality - I need to get to know the reviewer to feel like I can trust their recommendations, and to know how to situate their tastes in relation to mine. In that aspect, Substack publications like yours are so helpful! The more consistently I read or listen to someone's views, the more I appreciate what they are saying.
I write music reviews and have written a fair amount of book reviews as well, so it is an interesting topic. I agree with you here. If I am writing a review, it is going to be about something I like. When I first started writing music reviews, I made a few negatory ones, and my editor at the time guided me out of that, as per the standards of his website. It was to give listeners a place to go find something they wanted to listen. This is especially good for artists and writers who may not get enough exposure anyway. No need to tear anyone down who no one has heard much of yet anyway. But as you mentioned, if it is someone established, a poor review compared to other works by them might be needed.
I am sure I am guilty about showing off what else I have read and listened to, and how much I know about it, when writing a review of a book or album. I can get why that is a turn off, if it isn't balanced with an honest take on what is to like and enjoy about a piece of music or book. At the same time, I think that part of the job of the reviewer, and non-fiction writer in general, is to make connections between other literary or musical works. That being said, I avoid all the major and mainstream publications for these things. My first lessons in writing music reviews came from reading very short ones in punk rock zines after all.
I find it interesting that negative book reviews frequently drag on, sometimes eloquently, but I’m thinking, “got your point…next”. I rarely finish a negative review, although I may miss something that could inform a decision whether to read the book in spite of a negative review. So many books; so little time.
In my own reviews I try to strike a balance between talking about my personal enjoyment and my more analytical thoughts. I tend to enjoy books more when they demand intellectual engagement. But I love a pleasure read too! At the end of the day, I want my book reviews to be intellectual when the book is that way. Reviews (imho) should be a reflection of the book itself.
I'm always looking for how a book made a reviewer feel, or think, as others have said. My posted book reviews are, like yours, short, and I also post only reviews of books I enjoyed. There's already enough negativity on the internet. I am an eclectic reader so I do take into account the book's genre as well as its intended audience.
For me with a review of any medium, I treat them more as a coming attractions sort of thing. I’m interested in knowing what’s coming out , what’s the general impression of the thing , etc. I’ve used your newsletter almost like the old scholastic book orders.
I am old and time is short. I want to read interesting books; the kind of book(s) I don't want to put down: fiction or non-fiction. The book review should be all about the reader and the reviewer.
Many books I read are better as long articles: too much fluff and unnecessary historical perspective.
Hi Jeremy think my recommendations are similar in that I generally also only publish recommendations that I have enjoyed. My original ones were more for me as way to record what I was reading, a one line ish summary and some details about the book, chapters, length that sort of stuff. It s only been relatively recently that I have posted these and started to get a few others who seem to benefit from them. Definitely agree that it’s a subset of readers, but for me happy with what o put out, and live your ones as helps me widen the books I don’t know about. For example you review of the Black count, by Tom Reiss was timely as I had not long finished the Count of Monte Cristo, so to find this book existed was fantastic. Keep it up!
I totally get where you're coming from! Book reviews can sometimes feel like they're more about the reviewer flexing their literary muscles than actually helping you decide if a book is worth your time. Personally, I'm all about straightforward reviews that tell me if a book is enjoyable and who might like it. I appreciate your approach of keeping it concise and positive in your newsletter.
Jeremy, I tend not to read a lot of the traditional reviews that follow the format of - you should read this book because.... I also don't enjoy the big heads who make their reviews more about how smart they are. I enjoy reviews that tie the book in with life. How did it make you feel? What things connected to your real life? Did you learn something? That is what I enjoy reading and also the type of thing I tend to write. I sure there is an appetite for all types of different reviews so none of these are necessarily good or bad but just different preferences. Thanks!
This:
'By the end, it often feels like the review is more about showing how much the reviewer knows rather than telling us if the book at hand is readable, enjoyable, and recommendable.'
YES. I do like Ron Charles reviews in The Washington Post, but NYTimes and the freelance reviews in WaPo leave me cold. Stop showing off and tell me how the book made you *feel*.
In a world where award winning books can sit on a shelf in a bookstore right beside the latest schlock with 100,000 amazon 5 stars, but only because it entertains …and for the same price…. book reviews like yours are immensely helpful.
(You pay more for gifted art and live music, but not the written word? Yet , this poor person is glad of it)
Help me avoid mediocre writing, formulaic stories, hidden propaganda, erotica, and unnecessary foul language. Point out books worthy of second reads or passing on to my teenage grandkids. Those that help the reader empathize with situations reflecting real people they would never meet in their own bubble.
Thought provoking, world building, changed my life kind of books. They are out there hidden among the over published, over promoted, trend of the moment, flash in the pan.
Thanks for helping me sort through the stacks to find them. Keep up the good work!!
For over 10 years I've been writing short 50 to 250 word notes to myself about each book I read. Just as a way to collect my thoughts, sometimes in shorthand, usually in long form. I try to just record what I enjoyed or didn't enjoy about the book so I can circle back to it at the end of the year, or many years later.
I think for other people sharing their reviews I just want brevity and something that exposes their personality and gets to the heart of why they loved/liked/disliked the book. I enjoy snark and wit, but brevity always :).
I've also been thinking about this a lot as I am building a book review format on Shepherd.com, and I want the format to be focused on building a profile of what that reader loves to read so that I can use that to help them find other people who share their Book DNA, and then use that shared DNA to connect them with books they will love.
If you are curious to see an early preview test here is the format I am playing with: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfenTlEAe_A4huUeWZpX3hfKCcHDOfjlFJq7ES2E9yGwMbijw/viewform
Learning a lot :)
I want to know how a book made you feel, about what it made you think, what was your experience while reading it, what are your thoughts on the writing, the story, whatever you think is relevant. I don’t need to read the blurb, I can look the book up and read what it is about myself, I want to know what it does to people.
I read reviews for a simple purpose: to determine if the book is worth the investment of my time to read (the true cost of a book isn't the price!). So for me, the review needs to touch on several topics:
-Validate that the publisher's book description (i.e., my initial understanding of the book's topic) is correct, and expand on it as necessary.
-Establish that the reviewer is someone whose opinion I can rely on: truthfulness, knowledge of the genre, clear and grammatical writing, perhaps some personality insights. (This isn't necessary for me in the case of some regular reviewers; for instance, Jeremy's reviews have already proven trustworthy to me.)
-Describe personal reactions to the book, particularly writing structure, theme, character development, pacing, etc. How did the book make the reviewer feel? Did the author have good command of language? Were the characters b8elievable? Did anything stand out, positively or negatively? Was it strictly a pleasure read, or was it enjoyable from the author's use of language, or was it enlightening on a theme or subject?
-Most importantly, did the author consider the book to be a good return on the investment of their time?
Great point about book reviews in big publications! I feel the same way - I dislike reading most reviews from these big names because it seems like 90% of the review is just telling me the entire plot of the story, with just a few lines at the end with their opinion. I often read a review and think "Okay, I have no idea whether I would like this book, but now that I know the whole story I guess I don't need to read it?"
I think this is a big part of why Neha and I hesitate to use the word 'review' in our podcast and newsletter - we are not here to give long summaries of books (there are plenty of places online to find those). We're here to talk about how a book made us feel, what it means, and what it made us think about.
I think one of the biggest things missing in a lot of book reviews is personality - I need to get to know the reviewer to feel like I can trust their recommendations, and to know how to situate their tastes in relation to mine. In that aspect, Substack publications like yours are so helpful! The more consistently I read or listen to someone's views, the more I appreciate what they are saying.
- S
I write music reviews and have written a fair amount of book reviews as well, so it is an interesting topic. I agree with you here. If I am writing a review, it is going to be about something I like. When I first started writing music reviews, I made a few negatory ones, and my editor at the time guided me out of that, as per the standards of his website. It was to give listeners a place to go find something they wanted to listen. This is especially good for artists and writers who may not get enough exposure anyway. No need to tear anyone down who no one has heard much of yet anyway. But as you mentioned, if it is someone established, a poor review compared to other works by them might be needed.
I am sure I am guilty about showing off what else I have read and listened to, and how much I know about it, when writing a review of a book or album. I can get why that is a turn off, if it isn't balanced with an honest take on what is to like and enjoy about a piece of music or book. At the same time, I think that part of the job of the reviewer, and non-fiction writer in general, is to make connections between other literary or musical works. That being said, I avoid all the major and mainstream publications for these things. My first lessons in writing music reviews came from reading very short ones in punk rock zines after all.
I find it interesting that negative book reviews frequently drag on, sometimes eloquently, but I’m thinking, “got your point…next”. I rarely finish a negative review, although I may miss something that could inform a decision whether to read the book in spite of a negative review. So many books; so little time.
In my own reviews I try to strike a balance between talking about my personal enjoyment and my more analytical thoughts. I tend to enjoy books more when they demand intellectual engagement. But I love a pleasure read too! At the end of the day, I want my book reviews to be intellectual when the book is that way. Reviews (imho) should be a reflection of the book itself.
I'm always looking for how a book made a reviewer feel, or think, as others have said. My posted book reviews are, like yours, short, and I also post only reviews of books I enjoyed. There's already enough negativity on the internet. I am an eclectic reader so I do take into account the book's genre as well as its intended audience.
I like a good objective review not a sales job by the publisher
For me with a review of any medium, I treat them more as a coming attractions sort of thing. I’m interested in knowing what’s coming out , what’s the general impression of the thing , etc. I’ve used your newsletter almost like the old scholastic book orders.
I am old and time is short. I want to read interesting books; the kind of book(s) I don't want to put down: fiction or non-fiction. The book review should be all about the reader and the reviewer.
Many books I read are better as long articles: too much fluff and unnecessary historical perspective.
Hi Jeremy think my recommendations are similar in that I generally also only publish recommendations that I have enjoyed. My original ones were more for me as way to record what I was reading, a one line ish summary and some details about the book, chapters, length that sort of stuff. It s only been relatively recently that I have posted these and started to get a few others who seem to benefit from them. Definitely agree that it’s a subset of readers, but for me happy with what o put out, and live your ones as helps me widen the books I don’t know about. For example you review of the Black count, by Tom Reiss was timely as I had not long finished the Count of Monte Cristo, so to find this book existed was fantastic. Keep it up!
I totally get where you're coming from! Book reviews can sometimes feel like they're more about the reviewer flexing their literary muscles than actually helping you decide if a book is worth your time. Personally, I'm all about straightforward reviews that tell me if a book is enjoyable and who might like it. I appreciate your approach of keeping it concise and positive in your newsletter.
Jeremy, I tend not to read a lot of the traditional reviews that follow the format of - you should read this book because.... I also don't enjoy the big heads who make their reviews more about how smart they are. I enjoy reviews that tie the book in with life. How did it make you feel? What things connected to your real life? Did you learn something? That is what I enjoy reading and also the type of thing I tend to write. I sure there is an appetite for all types of different reviews so none of these are necessarily good or bad but just different preferences. Thanks!