Four personal rules for online reviews

So, there's another debate around the blogosphere about online reviews. I thought I could share some thoughts about my personal guidelines for what I expect to lead to a decent look over other's work. Those are not set in stone, though, just some things I'd mostly like to discuss with readers, writers and fellow reviewers.

1) Respect myself, or talk about the things that matter

I blog to share my loves, not my hates. I won't waste my time, nor the reader's, with a book I can't find absolutely interesting for some reason. If I managed to finish the book, that's because I found it 51% good, which deserves some comments. Less than 50% doesn't deserve attention.

Too radical? Not quite.

The internet is full of people talking about the things I would find boring, like most epic fantasy and hard SF and many of those less-than-50%-of-goodness books. That's the magic of crowd sourcing. There's room for everybody. One has only to find the right reviewer, or the reviewer must find the right audience, and both stick to each other.

Of course that doesn't mean I can't be disappointed by something I thought I would love, nor that I can't criticize something good that has its flaws. The things that matter in those good 51% and the important things to notice about those bad 49% must be highlighted.

2) Respect the audience, or be quick, be deep and don't push an opinion

I try to say upfront how much I liked the book as to let the reader know if that title (and the review) is of any interest. Does the book delivers what it proposes? What about style and characters?

As I said, if somebody is reading a review, then it is because he's interested in the given book and already thinks the story might be good. But he wants to know why the book's so good. So, no shallow review is a good one, nor is a detailed plot summary any better. I try to dig in plot, characters and subtext to find out what the writer was up to. His opinions, his agenda. Most books are a single phrase diluted in a hundred thousand words and I think a good review points what this secret phrase might be. That is the most significant thing a reviewer can do.

But the one thing I find most annoying in reviews, on- or offline, is when somebody dares to tell me to avoid a book. Who does this person thinks he is to know what I may find interesting or not? Show some respect!

The thing is: there's a niche for everyone. Every style. Every genre. Every single book.

3) Respect the text, or don't think I've figured it all

One hundred thousand words of dialogues, references, characterization, action and subtext is a lot. I won't pretend I got it all and will be honest to admit it. I will think if the fact that I wasn't able to like the story is a problem with the author or a problem with me.

Besides the existence of tough authors, there are those days when I simply won't understand the text. It will slip and dodge from my attention and that day will be both a bad time to read and review.

4) Respect the Author, be polite, don't rant and try to know him/her

This item I find most useful when reviewing anthologies. Though I'll pick up an anthology I'm totally interested in, the sheer number of different authors, stories and styles, raises the amount of pieces I won't like, to the point that I won't see any reason to review it. But if I do, I'm quite sure there will be stories not of my likings.

I think every single author who managed to sit for months (or days/hours, for short fiction) and did write a complete story deserves some level of respect. That is, even if the story, the text or any other thing is abhorrent, be polite. In short: why rant? What good does a hateful review? It's not good for the audience, not good for the author and maybe even worse to the reviewer, since everybody hates a troll.

One thing that helps, but its not always available, is to know the writer. I'm on the opinion that you can't separate the artist from his piece of art. In any level. For example, knowing the political background of, say, China Mieville, I find it most amusing and understandable his short story Jack. Wikipedia helps a lot. The author's blog and news about him too. And for those available on Facebook, a little chat reveals a lot and helps giving feedback.