It's been almost a month and a discussion still hasn't happened. I apologize for that. A few weeks ago, my mother passed away, it was extremely sudden, so our focus on the blog had shifted.
However, I've come to love this blog as if it was a child and I don't want to abandon it. So, let's discuss something that's been bothering me from day one of blogging.
This topic has been bugging me almost every day it seems. I'm a lover of Goodreads. Sometimes, I would even call myself a Goodreads snob. If a book has a rating below a 3.7, I probably won't check it out. But that's not what has been bothering me.
What bothers me is when I go to look at reviews and I'll come across some that are pages long. Now, I'm not saying they are bad. Some of them are hilarious and really insightful. When I read these long reviews, it makes me look at my own reviews and start to question; Am I reviewing wrong? Are my reviews too short and repetitive?
The old question comes to mind when I think about this, does size matter?
This topic has probably been brought up many times before but regardless of that, it's something I deal with every day when I go on GR or when it's time to sit down and write a review of my own.
When I write my reviews, I try to use the outline of what one of my professors gave us when we had to write readers responses to classmates. First start off giving a brief explanation of the story. What happened? Then, write down some things you liked about it and maybe a few things you didn't think worked. Finally, we had to give suggestions on what we thought would work better. When it comes to reviews, I skip that step and go straight into my final thoughts.
I thought this was a good idea. But then I read the goodreads reviews...
So my question(s) are, are longer reviews better? Does it change your opinion on the book if the review is filled with details upon details? And what do you look for in a review?