Book Reviews, Why Do You Write Them?

A couple of weeks ago I went over to Talli Roland’s blog and saw a post that subsequently sat incubating in my mind since. Her post was an off shoot of a discussion that arouse in Clarissa Draper’s blog post.  And now it seems to have spiralled into another post from me which I’m sure will elicit discussion elsewhere.

Initially Clarissa was asking whether she should spend a voucher she won on a Giveaway for her blog or to buy and review her fellow authors’ books. One comment on that blog inspired Talli to explain that Publishing Is A Business and therefore reviewers should not expect free copies after publication. She did stress though that she does think ARCS should be free and that the post does not apply to book bloggers or media who review books. 

One of the questions that immediately reared in my head was: Who is the bookblogger? Does that distinction apply to blogs like mine or is it something more professional (lack of a better word)? I’d really love clarity on that.

But I agree completely with the premise of Talli’s argument. She says reviewers should buy books once published and not expect handouts in exchange for a review.  I understand this because wouldn’t call up  Louise Bradshawe or Jean Auel and say I’d like them to send me a copy of their book because I want to review it? Who does that anyway? Are there complete morons out there who figure they should leech the author out of their living in exchange for  “goodwill”.

However, this whole book review issue between writer and reviewer has had me asking the question? Do writers and reviewers have the same end goal in mind? The obvious answer is no because the immediate goals are clearly different but for the bigger picture I think the question is relevant.

I assume that writers have a common (almost immediate) goal and that is write stories that they love and that their readers will hopefully love and make some, ok lots, of money along the way. 

But its not that simple with reviewers. We have different reasons for reading and reviewing, perhaps this is where things go wrong.  I’m sure we have all been exposed to every type of reviewer there is out there. 

• There are reviews that are so syrupy sweet you have to brush your teeth when you finish reading (that is if you had the stomach to finish). I always imagine that this is a review from a beloved family member or friend who is guaranteed free copies for their rest of their lives because of their rose tinted lenses. So chances of it being a good point of referral are slim.
• You also get great reviews which are balanced and fair, you will note that I did not add "right" because that one is even more subjective.
• And others following more the “reader beware” principle put the fear of reviewers in me as they do a completely believable rendition of Jack The Ripper, whether the review was requested or not. Personally these are the ones that leave me feeling completely mortified on a stranger’s behalf. And these are also the ones which prove to me beyond reasonable doubt that as reviewers we have completely different motivators for doing what we do. 

 So I suppose the question really is: Are blogger/writers selecting reviewers who decided to review simply for sharing their opinion or can they detect that they are motivated by a desire to contribute to the betterment of the reading and writing community (bigger picture)?

• Do you think there is a distinction?
• Do you feel it incumbent upon you to review not only for the reader but the writer too or do you think that is the editors job?  
• As a reviewer, do you have the same outlook towards a book you bought by an author you will never communicate with on any level as to that of an author you either met on blogsphere or one who sends you a request?
• Do you have a different perspective of what defines book reviewing (in fact what book reviews are about?)

I’d really like to hear what you think about these issues because I think there are a lot of ideals surrounding the reviewing principle but life does not necessarily reflect ideals.