Young Adult Book Genres and Negative Book Reviews

I don't have time for a full round-up - I'm leaving for Austin, TX first thing in the morning. But there are two discussions going on around the kidlitosphere that I think are interesting.

First, Anita Silvey has sparked a bit of discussion regarding the interests of current young adult readers. She wrote in a recent School Library Journal article that she thought that young adults were turning more to genre fiction (fantasy, mystery, etc.) instead of reading the traditional realistic novels that started with A Catcher in the Rye. This discussion has been taken up on a number of blogs, including Read Roger (who is tired of the large number of young adult fantasy novels coming across his desk) and Original Content. I agree with Gail Gauthier that it's nothing new for young adults to read genre fiction (Agatha Christie was my crossover adult novelist). I also have to admit that I tend to agree with Roger Sutton - to me there seem to be an awful lot of classic fantasy novels being published, and I've found for myself that I find more realistic novels refreshing. It's not that I don't like fantasy. It's just that in large doses it all starts to blur together for me.

The second topic undergoing discussion concerns book reviewing. Chasing Ray, A Fuse #8 Production, Blog from the Windowsill, Mary Pearson and A Chair, A Fireplace, and a Tea Cozy have all been discussing whether or not reviewers should post negative book reviews. The question is: should a book reviewer tell the truth about all books, or is it ok to write about the books that you like, and quietly skip the books that you don't like? I don't think that anyone is advocating writing positive reviews about books that the reviewer doesn't like. But a lot of people take a (as Wendy labeled it) "first, do no harm" approach, in which we don't write about the books that we dislike. I tend towards this myself, though I have posted a few lukewarm reviews of books.

Back in August Esme Raji Codell addressed this topic on her blog (when a reader asked her why she was rarely critical in her reviews). She said "I feel that when someone writes a children's book, they are trying their best to create art. They are trying to do something peaceful or thought-provoking in the world. They are trying to share something with a child. Whether or not I consider the effort to be completely successful, I have to respect that effort and those instincts, and I have no desire to "bust on that."" I think that I have tended towards this philosophy, too. I read really quickly, and I know that there are times when I don't give a book a chance. So who am I to then post a negative review about the book? Maybe I was just in a bad mood. Maybe if I actually finished the book, I would like it. Also, like Liz, I have very limited time for my reviews. I'd rather use that time to recommend books that I liked, rather than dissecting why I didn't like a particular book.

The whole debate has made me think about this in depth, however, and I think that I may try my hand at talking directly about some of the books that I haven't cared for. Fortunately, again like Liz, I'm a "book-liker". There actually aren't so many books that I read that I don't enjoy (at least within the genres that I tend to frequent). Therefore, it's usually easy for me to talk in a positive manner about the books that I read.

What do you think, readers of this blog? Would you like to see more negative reviews of books I don't like? Or are you happy with reading recommendations for books that I love? (I incidentally owe you reviews of Salem Witch (My Side of the Story) and Penny from Heaven, both of which I did like.)

Comments

[Colleen]

Somehow Jen a post I wrote about a post at Critical Mass got picked up and reinterpreted and now I find myself in the very strange place of having to justify my reviews. The "first do no harm" phrase that Wendy refers to originated in my comments, in basically a "conversation" between author Lauren Baratz-Logsted and myself in which we were specifically discussing reviewers who seem determined to write negative reviews. This topic is pretty hot in the lit circles these days - Galleycat pointed out on Friday several authors have sent letters into the NYTBR about it. No on is saying that only positive reviews should be written and no one is saying reviewers should be dishonest about books they read, but it is inappropriate that books be reviewed by people who don't like the genre or the author or even know enough about the subject (for nonfic) to write a fair review. That's something I find continuously annoying about negative reviews.

As for why it's so easy for me to write positive reviews, well - with the exception of Booklist I request pretty much all the books I end up reviewing and I'm pretty good at requesting what I think I'm going to like. (It's not a foolproof system but there have probably been only 5 books this year I've requested and then not liked enough to keep reading and thus review). As for Booklist - I'm going to write an entry on my site tomorrow explaining how that works. I think some folks might be misunderstanding how the recommends only idea works over there and mistakenly think that bad books get positive reviews to the detriment of librarians who use Booklist to help with ordering new titles. (That is 100% not at all what goes on.)

Finally, I personally think there is plenty of review space taken up by negative reviews (too much actually). I prefer to use the space I have available to spread the word on good books, on all genres, for all age groups and subject matter both heavy and light. I'm more than happy to let other folks do the negative reviewing and so far, my readers have been happy with the way I do things.

[Jen Robinson]

Hi Colleen,

Thanks so much for the thoughtful feedback. I certainly didn't mean to imply that I think that bad books get positive reviews - I've never seen that. For me, it's more been an interesting discussion because it's something that I've wondered about from the time to time in the short 10 months that I've been doing public book reviews. And while I didn't see it on your site, I have certainly seen people say that they (as individuals) only write positive reviews (though I haven't heard anyone say that only positive reviews should be written).

Anyway, I loved what you said about using the space that you have available to spread the word on good books. Thanks!

[booklogged]

I like most of the books I read, but occasionally I run across a real dud or one that I just hate. I feel it's perfectly okay for me to post my personal dislike for a book. I'm not taking away another's freedom to still read that book. Reader's disagree, and I think that's okay. Sometimes the timing isn't right for a certain book. Our past experiences affect the way we feel about a book. I estimate that I write 10 positive reviews for every negative one. That's my feelings and I appreciate you giving me the right to express them.

[Liz B]

As I ponder this, I also know what I don't like about some negative reviews. (Some I love, because there is the "click" of yes, you saw it too! It wasn't just me!). What I don't like is when the review is actually more about the reviewers likes/dislikes/wishes, as opposed to the book itself; and as with many things, the reviewers are clueless about it. The broad example is the fantasy hater who reviews fantasy and is negative about world building; but it can also be the King Dork review that quibbles that the main character is unbelievable because he was wrong about what bands are the greatest; or the reviewer who will always be negative about humor... Well, you get my drift. And I'm afraid that I would be one of "those" negative reviewers, without realizing it; saying more about me than the book. I'd probably spend twice as much time revising a negative post to make sure it was objective as I do my regular posts.

I'm almost glad I don't have the time to review all the books I read!

[Erin]

Keep up the positive reviews. I like to get recommendations. :)

I think it's okay to post slightly negative reviews of books, to "rant" about one if you are feeling particularly frustrated with it. Just don't do it too often.

[Erin]

One more thing - a reason I rarely do negative reviews is because, if I'm not liking a book, I *usually* put it down. Sometimes though I don't realize I didn't like it until I finish it.

[Colleen]

Yes Liz - that is what bothers me about negative reviews as well, when the reviewer is clearly reviewing the book he/she wishes they were reading and not the one they have (when they actually write about what the author should have written in the book or how it should have ended or whatever) and then it spills over into their review. (The King Dork bands thing is crazy!)

[MaryP]

I prefer the positive reviews. If the point of reviews is to steer you in the direction of good books, who has time for the other? And I know there are books where I have indeed read horrible reviews, and I ended up loving the book. Freewill by Chris Lynch, for instance. And of course, the opposite is true too--glowing reviews but the book didn't click for me. It is all so subjective. For me, the best reviews, give a brief summary without giving the whole story away, and also highlight the strengths. For instance, if they point out the the setting is so well developed it is like a character, or that the prose is fresh and surprising, or that the dialogue is sophisticated and loaded with subtext, or it has dry snappy humor, or . . . well, you get the idea. I like to hear the strengths. Some will appeal to me, others won't, and that is how I will decide if it's the right book for me. Negative comments don't do it for me.

[Kate S.]

I think that my reviews tilt toward the positive. I too choose the books that I want to review and while I may not love them all, I generally find something commendable in them. If I really dislike a book, I stop reading and, while I might mention my reasons for abandoning a book in passing on my blog, I would never write a review of a book I didn't finish.

I don't avoid posting negative assessments of books though. Although I love to read, I don't read solely for pleasure. I also read to learn more about writing. And while reading a brilliant book and figuring out why and how it works is a great way to learn about writing, so too is reading a book with flaws and trying to sort out what those flaws are.

I also enjoy engaging in critical discussion about books and, for me, that involves articulating my honest view of the strengths and weaknesses of the book in question, and engaging in a bit of back and forth with fellow readers who may agree or disagree with me. If I or they expressed only praise and suppressed criticism, the discussion would never get off the ground.

[Michele]

I've no objection to reading negative reviews if they're done in a positive way. Talking about why the book didn't satisfy you, rather than attacking the author. That's the angle I've tried to use on the odd occasions when I've written a negative review.

[Little Willow]

I am always honest in my reviews. I don't have the time to review every single book that I read, so I tend to review the titles I enjoy the most and/or that I wish to recommend. Accentuate the positive.

However, if I am assigned a book review for a publication and I don't care for the book, I'm still honest.

Looking forward to your reviews. The Salem Witchcraft Trials have always, always fascinated me. Penny From Heaven is on hold for me at the library.

Have a fun and safe trip.

[Alkelda the Gleeful]

A few of my early book reviews were snarky. I even got a letter from one of the illustrators scolding me for my tone. Now, I'm of the mind that whatever I write needs to be helpful and constructive and I like to read reviews of that ilk.

[Jone]

For me, I think what is most helpful in a review is the kid appeal. I am looking for books that will fly off the shelves for my school. The book really needs to grab my third through fifth graders. I don't mind negative reviews. Actually, they sometimes spark an interest for me to read to see if I have the same view.

[MotherReader]

You know, after reading so much about this for the past few days, I have a new direction for my blog. While many are focusing on positive reviews, I'll go totally negative, all the time. "Yellow Star?" Depressing schlock. "Baby Mouse?" Who cares about a mouse in middle school? "Don't Let the Pigeon Stay Up Late?" What was Mo...

Nah, can't do it.

[natalie_eve]

I post negative reviews. I'm snarky by nature, and I tend to rant. When I read a book that I hate, I feel the need to complain about the time I wasted on it.

Anyway, negative reviews are sometimes a lot more fun to read than positive ones. But maybe that's just me being sadistic.

[Jennifer, Snapshot]

This is a great line of thought. I have been reveiwing one book a week on my blog, and it's not the easiest thing to do. I like to tell readers what I liked about a book--why they might want to read it, but I also do mention what someone might not like about it. I think that many different people read many different kinds of books. So if I say, "I didn't care for the excessive profanity in the book," that's a negative point for me, but for others it wouldn't be. So in reading reveiws, I prefer that kind of slant--with information that would help me decide if it's the right book for me.

I would never write a positive review on a book I didn't enjoy, and do hope that reviews I read are honest. I would just choose not to publish anything about it.

Also--I've been hoping you would review Landon Snow. I've had it on my wishlist, and would love to know your thoughts. You can email me if you aren't going to post a review.

[alisa valdes-rodriguez]

Hello! I enjoy your reviews, and wanted to reach out to you regarding my new (and first) YA book, HATERS. I have some bestselling adult fiction books, but feel like HATERS is the best book I've written. Hope you like it.

Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez

[Jen Robinson]

Wow! It seems that if you post on a hot topic, and then go away for a few days and don't post anything above it, you can really get a lot of comments.

Thanks so much to everyone who contributed to this discussion. Your input is definitely helpful for me, as I think about where I'm going with this blog, and with my reviews. It's nice to hear the validation of doing mostly positive reviews, and also the freedom of expression that lets people like natalie_eve and booklogged feel free to post their negative reviews sometimes. I do agree that what most readers want is recommendations for books that they'll love, rather than lengthy descriptions of books that they won't want to read anyway. And of course I agree with the point made by several of you that if one is going to post a negative review, it shouldn't be gratuitously negative, but rather be constructive.

Two points that especially resonated with me from the discussion above were what MaryP said about how "the best reviews, give a brief summary without giving the whole story away, and also highlight the strengths". I definitely try to do this, as when I said about A Room on Lorelei Street that "The small, depressed town of Ruby, Texas is almost a character in the book". I also liked what Jennifer from Snapshot said about "mention(ing) what someone might not like about" a book.

And on that note, to respond to Jennifer's question about whether I'm going to review the Landon Snow books (a Christian fiction series, thoughtfully reviewed at Big A little a), the answer is no - I don't plan to write a full review (I'm already behind on several others that I do want to review). But I will share a few thoughts here. I had trouble getting through the first Landon Snow book because I found the surrealism a bit over the top. I had difficulty following the plot, and caring about the characters, because the events didn't seem to follow a clear system of rules. I know that some people like surrealism, but it just doesn't work for me in books. However, I did think that the author did an excellent job of keeping the story from being overwhelmed by the religious message. This is one of my personal biases in reading books - I always want the story to come first, ahead of the message, regardless of what the message is. And I think that R.K. Mortenson did a good job with this (see also Kelly's discussion on Christian fiction in her review of this book).

That's all for now! Many, many thanks to everyone who commented.

[Becky Levine]

This thread on negative reviews has struck a chord. I've only done a few what I call recommendations on my blog, because it's read by a lot (I hope!) of people other than just kids' book readers and writers. Occasionally, though, when a book has moved or excited me, I've talked about it.

"Professionally," though, I review books for a journal, where they send me boxes of books, and I read and review all of them. Most of the time it's like Christmas--since all I ever really want for that holiday is more books. Sometimes, though, I get the book that is either awful enough to make me angry or bad enough to make me sad. And I have to review it. And I have to let the journal readers--often teachers and librarians trying to make choices--what I think is wrong with the book. Otherwise, they've got nothing to go on.

When do I get angry? When the writer is someone incredibly prolific, who writes a gazillion books a year, and clearly--from their writing--knows how to do it right, and they don't. When do I get sad? When its either a new author who has made a wonderful attempt & isn't quite there yet, or an established writer who clearly loves what they're doing, but still needs to learn more craft or maybe got rushed into doing things quickly and poorly for a publication schedule.

Either way, I have to write a very brief plot summary, a rating, and a very concise criticism.

It's not fun. (Okay, I'll admit it, when I'm mad, WRITING the thing can be fun, but sending it never is.) The last thing in the world I want to do is discourage any writer from trying again--not that I think my criticism has that weight or power, but still--writers read reviews, and we all hope for praise.

So why do I keep doing this? Well, yes, it's like Christmas. And someone's going to, so maybe I can keep the edge of the nastiness down, concentrate on the story problems, and get the info out there without hurting too many feelings? I guess that's what I try for!

[Jen Robinson]

Thanks for the thoughtful comments, Becky. I always wanted to get nothing but books for Christmas, too. I think that if you are responsible for reviewing certain books, whether you like them or not, some of the reviews must really be a chore. But I'm sure that there are enough wonderful books, for which talking about them is a joy, that this balances out.

For me, all of this has been helpful in thinking about what constitutes a well-written review, and what I can do better. Because I think that whatever we write, whether books or book reviews, we should do the best we can with it. Thanks for the feedback!