![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
juushikaThank goodness I enjoy reading at this recent breakneck pace, because—as I knew would happen—many of my library holds have just come in. I stagger my holds, of course—sometimes putting a hold on a specific copy with a later due date, sometimes putting holds on books with many prior holds. Even so, I keep a pretty lengthy hold list, and it's at 17 18 right now (as I added another since starting this post). I was next in line on a good number of those and hanging there, and I was sure they were all going to fall on me at the same time. And of course they have. Of those 18, six books have come in and are waiting on my shelf. That, plus the book review I have left to do, the two books I still have checked out and unread, and the one more I have in the mail ... well, I have some busy book days coming up, needless to say.
While I'm on the subject of books, and therefore book reviews, allow me to rant for a moment about book summaries: how not to write them.
When I began writing my book reviews, I approached the process with little forethought. There was no structure, and I generally jammed in a paragraph of summary somewhere near the beginning of my review. Now, I have a pretty firm layout: an introductory paragraph, including a two sentence summary of the book's premise, the gist of my review, and my recommendation; two paragraphs given to critique and praise; one paragraph for more personal reaction, restating my recommendation at the end. This isn't a superior layout, but it works well for my needs.
Meanwhile, I enjoy reading all sorts of reviews: spoiler-heavy discussions, purely personal responses, two sentence reactions and recommendations. All sorts of reviews ... except two. And they both put me off because of how they do book summaries.
Do not copy your book summary from Amazon.com or the back of the book. If I wanted to read the product description—then I would. The book summaries on Amazon do not appear, effortlessly, out of the ether; they are the product of someone's hard work and probably a company's product, and there is no excuse for stealing their work. Both of these alternatives are lazy, and as they are merely information copied from one place to another, they serve no useful purpose. I see them all the time in reviews on LiveJournal, and it always makes me skip over the review. It is such a lazy recourse, and why would I read the reaction of someone who can't take the time to write a summary in their own words?
Do not spend numerous paragraphs describing the entire plot in detail—especially if your plot summary eclipses your actual review of the book. Yes, it can be useful to know what a book is about before reading, and some people want plenty of prior information. But there is such a thing as too much information: if you're spoiling later plot developments, or even the ending of the book; or if you provide only summary and no recommendation, you only communicate that there is indeed a book with a plot, not whether or not they are both worth reading. I see this appear frequently on Amazon.com reviews, in particular reviews by Teens Read, Too. This summary style doesn't anger me as copy pasting does, but I skip reviews that include it—because, not unlike a middle school book report, it is not the reviewers job to rewrite the book in fewer words; it would, in fact, be nice if the reviewer wrote a review.
Crazy, I know.
I'm partial to my own two-sentence summaries because I like to approach a book knowing only its basic premise—that, and some information about the quality of book, or its themes, or its affect on the reader, or just a healthy recommendation. The content of the book matters, but to me the quality of the book matters more. In other words, my reviews are what I would want to read from others. It doesn't make them the best or the most useful, not by a long shot, but I'll take almost anything over a copied book summary or one that takes up five paragraphs.
While I'm on the subject of books, and therefore book reviews, allow me to rant for a moment about book summaries: how not to write them.
When I began writing my book reviews, I approached the process with little forethought. There was no structure, and I generally jammed in a paragraph of summary somewhere near the beginning of my review. Now, I have a pretty firm layout: an introductory paragraph, including a two sentence summary of the book's premise, the gist of my review, and my recommendation; two paragraphs given to critique and praise; one paragraph for more personal reaction, restating my recommendation at the end. This isn't a superior layout, but it works well for my needs.
Meanwhile, I enjoy reading all sorts of reviews: spoiler-heavy discussions, purely personal responses, two sentence reactions and recommendations. All sorts of reviews ... except two. And they both put me off because of how they do book summaries.
Do not copy your book summary from Amazon.com or the back of the book. If I wanted to read the product description—then I would. The book summaries on Amazon do not appear, effortlessly, out of the ether; they are the product of someone's hard work and probably a company's product, and there is no excuse for stealing their work. Both of these alternatives are lazy, and as they are merely information copied from one place to another, they serve no useful purpose. I see them all the time in reviews on LiveJournal, and it always makes me skip over the review. It is such a lazy recourse, and why would I read the reaction of someone who can't take the time to write a summary in their own words?
Do not spend numerous paragraphs describing the entire plot in detail—especially if your plot summary eclipses your actual review of the book. Yes, it can be useful to know what a book is about before reading, and some people want plenty of prior information. But there is such a thing as too much information: if you're spoiling later plot developments, or even the ending of the book; or if you provide only summary and no recommendation, you only communicate that there is indeed a book with a plot, not whether or not they are both worth reading. I see this appear frequently on Amazon.com reviews, in particular reviews by Teens Read, Too. This summary style doesn't anger me as copy pasting does, but I skip reviews that include it—because, not unlike a middle school book report, it is not the reviewers job to rewrite the book in fewer words; it would, in fact, be nice if the reviewer wrote a review.
Crazy, I know.
I'm partial to my own two-sentence summaries because I like to approach a book knowing only its basic premise—that, and some information about the quality of book, or its themes, or its affect on the reader, or just a healthy recommendation. The content of the book matters, but to me the quality of the book matters more. In other words, my reviews are what I would want to read from others. It doesn't make them the best or the most useful, not by a long shot, but I'll take almost anything over a copied book summary or one that takes up five paragraphs.
