How many is too many?

I'm not sure what the point of having a gazillion reviews attached to popular books is. I think it's more important to review books no one else has or one's where you seem to have information or an opinion none of the other reviews have brought out.

How many reviews are you likely to read for a book? Are a lot of reviews more helpful in deciding whether to read the book than just a few would be?

The point may be that people want to review the books in their catalog. It makes no difference to me how many people have already review The Hobbit. I want my review of it in my catalog.

Yes, I review my books after I have read them no matter how many others are already there, though I do sometimes pick books off my TBR pile based on lack of reviews.

Heh ... one of the advantages to not reading fiction is that one rarely finds a lot of reviews ... I'm the only one to have written a review for about half of the books I've reviewed, and there are three or fewer reviews up for 80% of the books that I've reviewed!

 

If the review is just for your own use, wouldn't it be better in a comment field? The reviews are supposed to be for the use of the general public. And it seems to me no one's going to read more than ten or so reviews. Though this problem, if it is a problem to anyone but me, is not unique to LT. Popular books on Amazon will have large numbers of reviews, many which don't say much.

The reviews are supposed to be for the use of the general public.

Where do you get that idea?

If the review is just for your own use, wouldn't it be better in a comment field?
No. It's a review. It goes in the review field of my catalog.

For myself, I still write reviews even if there's a bunch already written, though I do try to put a little more effort into those. If there's already 12+ reviews, then I don't really see a reason to add, "Oh, this book is cool." I find it's good practice for writing other reviews.

For example, after I read Moby Dick I really wanted to review it, but what do you say about a book that's so well known and widely reviewed? So I had to think about what it was about the experience of reading it that was startling, and how can I best communicate that?

But I'd never say you shouldn't write a review just because there's a bunch up there. If it really irks someone to read through tons of reviews, they can always sort reviews by votes and read the top few. It's one of the beautiful things about LT that you have options.

I'd still put a review up, even if the book has had a bunch of reviews already. If you do a lot of reviews, you may have people that trust your opinion over anyone else's, and want to hear what you have to say about that book.

With more popular works, it can be a bit harder, but I still think it's valuable to have as many opinions as possible out there.

6: From WikiThing article Review

What is a review?

There is some debate over what constitutes a review, but in general, a review is a statement of your opinion about a book. Some reviews contain a summary or description of the book as well. Reviews will appear on the work page and will be read by others; your own personal notes about a book might be better suited to one of the "Comments" fields.

>10 astherest: Reviews will appear on the work page and will be read by others; your own personal notes about a book might be better suited to one of the "Comments" fields.

The fact that "reviews will appear on the work page and will be read by others" does not mean that reviews are for others and that their purpose is to serve others. It simply means that you should be aware that others will see your review. If a review is more than "personal notes," it should count as a review.

The thing is, that if you add a review, it may be better than the ones that are already there. That can't be bad, even if it means there are more reviews.

#1- On Amazon and on LT, some people only read reviews from those that they have marked as friends or interesting libraries. They aren't going to the work page and wading through hundreds of reviews. They're just pulling up reviews from certain people. That's one reason for some to post their review no matter how many are already there.

I never read reviews before reading a book. I like to come at it fresh and then write my own review (which I like to have in my own library). Once I've reviewed it, I like to read what everyone else thought. For the books that have loads of reviews, I might not read all of them. Sometimes I skim and pick out the interesting ones.

re several levels of "reviewing" a book," but ALL go under "review" on LT.

When you are asked to do a review on a book from a paying agency, however, you better have the mental cohones to examine theme, motif, as well as story. And whether you enjoyed it or not really isn't relative. A paid review is published to people WHO DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINION. Just your thoughts.

>andy

I can't help but think that if they've asked me to do a review, then they're asking me because they've read some of my others and thought they would serve their purposes. So why on earth would I change what works and is presumably the reason I was asked in the first place?

I don't care about theme and motif. My readers care about my opinion, not theme and motif. If they want theme and motif, they should ask someone (like the NYT) who examines that in his reviews. Not me.