Hi. It’s me. Maybe you missed me yesterday? Well, I did! My brain was involved in a historical I was reading for the annual RITA contest and it didn’t come up for air. I have two extreme ways of being: completely focused, or completely not! Well, anyway…I thought I’d crack open that old discussion about rating/reviewing books.
Here are the rules I try to play by:
Be Objective. This means that I take your personal preferences out of the mix. If there’s a type of romance I don’t care for, I don’t judge on that basis. I look at how this romance compares to the standard of its type.
Don’t be a copyeditor. It isn’t the copyeditor you are judging, it’s the author’s work. A few typos, grammar errors or inconsistencies I can overlook. (I might add that I am doing ‘first round’ judging–the finalists will be judged a second time).
Look for something special that makes the book stand out. That may be the use of historical detail; the characters; the way the story draws me in and keeps my interest; the way the story explores its theme, taking me deeper throughout; the writing itself; the way the story plays out, keeping me engaged until the end–so that when I close the book I feel that it kept its promise and did not let me down.
It is difficult sometimes. We all have little things that we dislike that may or may not be an issue for anyone else–that may in fact be expected in the kind of romance we are reading. Yes, we do talk about clothes in traditional Regencies–not always, but we do. We often are writing about the upper classes in England. They had money, society was important, and they wore fashionable clothes, and sometimes it is expected that we tell what they were wearing. A judge may dislike references to fashion, but she should consider the genre.
I have a problem with cliches–little ones, like “her feet were encased in white satin shoes” instead of “she wore white satin shoes,” and various parts of a woman’s finery being referred to as “a confection of …,” and so forth. Just little word combinations that were fresh once but that have been repeated many times. But I don’t let this throw me when judging. I look at the big picture.
Having said all this, I still struggle. So…I would like to hear what you all look for in a book when reviewing it or judging it. What standards do you hold yourself to? Where do you draw the line between objectivity and subjectivity?
And finally…what do you think makes a winning book?
Laurie, with more questions than answers!
LORD RYBURN’S APPRENTICE
Signet, January 2006
Well, ah, I never had to review or judge anything, but for me a winning book is simply one that I enjoyed 100%! 🙂 Have many of those on my shelves there! 🙂
Lois
I just finished a reading binge which included five A books and one C. (An unusually good run for me–and this is my own amateur grading system, not an external one). The problem with the C was that compared with the A’s I felt no compulsion to keep reading. The h/h were well drawn, but there wasn’t really any conflict between them and the external conflict was so thin as to be non-existent. And though I liked the lead characters, their interactions weren’t interesting enough to keep me reading. I finished, but after much skimming…
Hmm, well as a reviewer I do like you do – put aside personal feelings about the period etc. In fact, I often choose books outside of my comfort zone – have found some great reads that way.
I have fairly high standards – want the history to be pretty accurate and the general tone of the novel to feel right (if it’s a medieval, I want to feel the medieval atmosphere). Most of all, I want a story that captivates me and protagonists I care about.
Sounds like you’re doing your best, Laurie. The best any contestant can ask, IMHO.
I do take points off for major flaws: muddy motivation, flat characters, totally egregious and pervasive errors of research (NOT the occasional nit–we are all human), slow pacing.
But a lack of major flaws isn’t enough for me to assign a top score. A winning book, to me, has characters who resonate in my mind for days after reading it.
Elena