Reading your stars: starred book reviews in review

five stars 300x109 Reading your stars: starred book reviews in review

A few years ago I reviewed a book and gave it a rating of 3 stars, which in my rating scale equates to a book that’s “good”. The author, however, took this star rating as quite the opposite, and posted a number of tweets and comments about my negative review. The author’s response made me reflect on my use of star ratings in my reviews, and though with a few exceptions I’ve continued to use them, but I still feel a little ambivalent about the whole star rating concept.

Below are a few thoughts on the role of the starred review and what they may mean to the reader or reviewer.

Starred ratings stand in for a review

Let’s start with the obvious, and with the point that I suspect triggered the aforementioned author’s response. I tend to write quite lengthy reviews, and I certainly don’t expect that my readers read every word of each review (although, you know, I hope you do. Think of the blood and sweat that goes into them!). This is particularly true of one-off visitors or people who are interested in more of a quick “yay or nay” approach rather than an actual review. It wouldn’t surprise me at all, then, if readers skip straight down to count the pretty stars at the bottom of the page.

One solution that might encourage my readers to read the whole review would be to remove my star ratings, or perhaps to break up my reviews into separate sections with each section given its own discrete star rating. But readers read in different ways and have different requirements, and while some readers are happy to listen as I rave on about world-building and themes, others probably get what they need from referring to the star rating. And I can’t help but feel that by removing my ratings I’d be forcing a certain reading approach on to my readers, and that’s not necessarily fair.

One thing that I do wonder about is the placement of the star rating. My blog includes the rating in the category list at the top of the page, but the actual star graphic is at the bottom of the page. I’d be curious to see whether the placement of the stars at the top or bottom influences whether a reader decides to read the full review.

Starred ratings can be indicative of whether you want to read a review

Starred ratings are of course limited in their facility. But again, the actual purpose of the starred review will very depending on your reader’s needs. A reader might not be interested in reading about a book that a reviewer has rated a poorly, so a quick check of the starred rating can provide them with the information that they need to decide whether to proceed. On the other hand, if a reviewer has given a negative rating to a book that has been otherwise universally acclaimed, this might be a reason for the reader to continue–they may wish to receive a different perspective.

The same applies for those looking to purchase a book: a star rating may encourage a potential buyer to read a review and then potentially go on (or not) to buy the book in question. Still, I suspect that the actual value of either the star rating or the review will depend on where the reader is in the buying cycle. Are they simply looking for an overview of the book? A quick and dirty “good or bad” rating? Or an in-depth review that will cement their commitment to purchase? The way that the reader engages with the star rating and review will likely depend on this.

The fact that authors are obsessed with their star ratings on sites such as Goodreads and Amazon shows that there’s at least a perceived link between star ratings and 1) media/review coverage and 2) purchasing habits.

But NB: starred ratings don’t have the same weighting across the board

Still, an obvious downside of using the stars is when readers such as the aforementioned author make an assumption about my star rating system. This, combined with the skim reading or non-reading of reviews can result in my reviews being seriously misconstrued. Star ratings are not weighted in the same manner from publication to publication or from blog to blog, and even within a reviewer’s body of work they can differ. As my familiarity with certain genres have grown, I find myself rating differently, and my ratings are also affected by my recent reads as well as subsequent reads to the book being reviewed. So not only are ratings variable between bloggers, but there’s also intra-variation.

My star ratings are as follows:

1: quite terrible (I tend not to review such books); 1.5: serious flaws; 2: okay; 2.5: not bad; 3: good; 3.5: very good; 4: excellent; 4.5: superb; 5: flawless

As you can see, my ratings tend to skew towards the positive rather than the negative. For me, a three star book is certainly worthy of your attention, whereas for another blogger a three star book might be something best avoided. The author mentioned above was likely unaware of the positive weighting of my star ratings, and this combined with the fact that they (let’s go with plural pronouns for simplicity’s sake) did not read the body of the review meant that they read my review as being a negative one rather than picking up on what was actually overall a quite positive commentary.

Star ratings are arbitrary

I touched on reviewer variation above, and would like to expand on the idea a little further. I’ve noted that my star ratings vary based on my growth as a reader/reviewer, and also based on my recent reads. But my ratings also vary across genres. Why?  Because I try to review books based on to what degree they achieve what I think it is that they’re setting out to achieve (note that this, too, is open to interpretation–an author may actually be striving for something utterly different from what I think they are). It would be ridiculous for me to review a horror novel with the same mindset as a romance novel or a classic. The conventions for each are different, and approaches to plot, character, theme and writing style are also highly varied–although obviously elements such as good writing and characterisation etc clearly show through regardless of the norms of a particular genre. I’m happy to reference or contrast books across different genres, but to say that Harry Potter is not Anna Karenina seems a little facetious.

Star ratings can be the result of a knee-jerk reaction

Where I, and likely most regular bloggers/reviewers, have a fairly systematic approach to applying a star rating to a book, readers and authors might want to take note that this isn’t necessarily the case for others who are infrequent or one-time reviewers. I’d argue that the vast majority of five star and one star reviews on sites such as Goodreads and Amazon can be discounted. The trend seems to be that any book that is enjoyed by the reader receives an immediate five star rating, which isn’t really the most helpful approach, given that if you pick books that you enjoy, and therefore enjoy what you read, everything you read becomes an automatic five starred book, making the rubrik effectively useless.

On the other hand, one star reviews bring with them an entirely different set of problems. I suspect that the vast majority of one one star reviews come about not so much because a book is truly terrible, but rather because there’s a disconnect between the book itself and the book that the reader was expecting to read. The one star review is therefore a sort of “warning” or a “payback” gesture given out of frustration at feeling that one’s time or money has been wasted from picking up a book that was not the book a reader had expected to sit down with.

In sum: a starred rating is plenty of things, but it’s not a review

So what to take from all of this? A key point for me, personally, is that a starred rating and a review can’t be conflated. One is not the other, and though some pictures may be worth a thousand words, I hardly think that this is the case where my rating graphics are involved.


Related Posts with Thumbnails