But my question is, does the amount of stars a book on average reflect the actual content of the book?
I have to ask myself this EVERY time I read a book that I saw was reviewed and highly rated. I see it's high rating and think "Oh this book is going to be good!" I get the book, read it, and feel deeply mislead. Buying the book solely based on high reviews, often makes me wonder whether reviews are even honest.
As a reader, I don't think there is ever a time a person absolutely loves a book start to finish. There may be pacing issues, or character development problems, or even with the huge wave of indie authors, A LOT of grammatical errors. I think even when you enjoy a book, it's ok not to like EVERYTHING about it.
For example, I read a book named "Hero" by Perry Moore. It was about a teenager with super powers, who just happened to be in the closet. The pace at first was slow, but once it got half way in it picked up. Im not a gay teenage boy, but I did really enjoy the love story it featured, and it opened a door of reading books featuring LGBT characters as protagonists.
I rated it a 3 out of 5, but not because I didn't like it. I based on several factors, including character development for a few side characters, and several others things I had issue with.
With that being said, I didn't find the book average, despite giving it an average score. I actually quite enjoyed it, and would've liked to see a sequel. However Perry Moore died in 2011, and it looks like his goal of releasing a sequel will die with him.
But can a 5 star review really be trusted? To me, it always appears 5 star reviews are given by people anticipating the launch of a book from a series they are already familiar with. They were written by family members or people in that person's circle. Or someone liked it, and was just too biased not to admit what they found wrong with the book.
Some authors are great writers. But no writer is a perfect writer. Cant a 2-4 star review just mean a book has character? Cant it also mean it has great potential? I mean, books about demons, or werewolves, or most supernatural creatures aren't being considered "classic" literature. So why cant you enjoy a book, but just simply have a pros and cons list? I've read a few 4-5 star books and haven't enjoyed them. And Ive read a few 3 star books,and liked them. Can it perhaps be based on a reader's feeling on the subject? I read a book about vampires, I rate it a 2, because Im a bit sick and tired of vampires. But to a reader who lives for them, it's obvious a 4 or 5 could be in that book's future. So a person's feelings on a subject can ultimately shape how they will look at the book.
As a person editing their first book, I know I probably wont impress everyone. I will do my best to try a different spin on a genre that has been done, but perhaps not in the same way I am attempting it. Will people love or hate it? I don't know. But I will take every review and use it to shape my next book to make it better than the first.
Because shouldn't that be what reviews do? Tell the truth so a writer can improve? As a writer, I know someone wouldn't be doing me a favor by not pointing out what could make my next work better.
I have to admit that a person I've conversed with on Goodreads brought this subject out of me. :) Pretty sure she knows who she is. But thank you for making me question whether a 5 star review is an honest review.
I've been seeing alot of books with high reviews, and to be honest it seemed as though they wrote the reviews themselves. If you're going to review you're own book, at least point out some things wrong with the book! :p
Dont make yourself obvious!