Who Says A Book Is Bad?

This week someone passed on the link to the 2005 All About Romance Readers' Poll. I'm always interested to see if other readers loved the same books that I loved, so I took a look at the interim results. Inspired by the books listed and not yet listed (and in serious procrastination mode) I decided to vote. Which is when I took more notice of all those categories and the fact that, for example, several books are nominated as Best Romance AND Worst Romance.

Now this didn't exactly surprise me--we all know that reading is subjective. I rave about books that you mightn't get. You recommend books I know I won't like. Which is fabulous because so many authors writing different kinds of romance stories all have a reading market. Plus, books that create a big enough, passionate reaction that some readers declare them "best ever" can create a similarly strong reaction in others...but in a negative way. That might be because the author took big risks, broke alleged rules, wrote something right out of the box.

How do you define "worst", anyway? Is it the book you wouldn't touch with a twenty-foot pole and therefore haven't read? Is it a book you couldn't get past the first page on? Or is it the "worst" of those you actually read right through to the end? (And if it was that bad, why read it to the end?)

To decide on my "best" selections I had to go to my keeper shelf to see which books were last year's releases. Then I had to sit a few minutes, reflecting on the stories to decide which had touched me most. It was tough work, deciding on one, but it was also fun to revisit all those wonderful books. But to go to that trouble for "worst"? Shaking my head.

Which leads me to an aside on negative reader reviews--why do people write these things and post them on, for example, amazon? Why bother devoting that time and energy to a negative experience? If they're hating a book as much as some of these reviews suggest, why did they continue reading? I don't get that mentality. Shaking my head again.

PS: I didn't vote for "worst" in the AAR Poll but I did vote for a whole lot of "bests" because good books deserve the applause.

posted by Bronwyn Jameson @ 11:44 AM

Comments:

i agree with you.

posted by

kim : 1:04 PM

I avoid that site like the plague because of their negative reviews. I'm with you -- if the book was so bad, why did you read the whole thing? Some reviewers seem never to read a good book. So why don't they take up another hobby? Knitting or shuffleboard or white water rafting perhaps.

posted by

Playground Monitor : 5:31 PM

LOL, Marilyn. And laughing some more because I'm picturing them knitting while whitewater rafting!

Hi Kim.

Bron

posted by

Bronwyn Jameson : 9:48 AM

I've heard that sadly some of those negative comments/reviews are from orher authors that are trying to get that author bad reviews.I dont understand this unless their reasoning is then they will have more readers for there books? Which is stupid because theres plenty of readers.One example of something I recently came across. I haven't read TO DIE FOR(love Lindas other books)yet,its on my wish list and I was going to order it and was so surprised about the negative comments about it? These comments never deter me from a book though,I find if people say its bad I usually disagree,lol. The same goes for movies too.

posted by

Dena : 1:55 AM

Dena, don't listen to those negative reviews. TO DIE FOR is, well, to die for! Fabulous snarky, clever, laugh out loud fun. Apart from the surly alpha hero, it's not your usual Linda Howard--which is why some people don't like it. To me it's just another sign of Howard's brilliant story-telling.

posted by

Bronwyn Jameson : 6:55 PM

I won't listen,even if its a little different than her other books,her writing is great.

posted by

Dena : 1:57 AM