# Reviewing books you haven't finished b/c you didn't like them-fair or not?



## AlbertB (Nov 11, 2014)

I hope this doesn't create a s**%*storm, but I think it's a fair topic. If I don't like a book to the point I can't finish it, I still believe that it deserves a review just as the ones I like do. If the book is well written, just not for me, I give it 3-4 stars. However, I always put in a disclaimer stating that I did not finish the book and listing how far I got through it before giving up-thanks Kindle for tracking that for me! If the book is truly horrid-plotting, grammar, typos-then I still put in the disclaimer, but give it a lesser review. I feel that, if I've purchased a book, then I have the right to give an honest review. Thoughts?


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Done it more than once.


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

I think people have the right to give their opinion based on the sample, so I certainly have no problem with a DNF review of a book you purchased.  The reason you don't finish a book may be the reason I want to read a book. It's all information that helps other readers make a decision.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

You're the reviewer.  You can and should review books however you want.  I've reviewed DNF books and I usually say why.  But lots of people just put a star rating on GR and don't say why they rated a book a particular way.  That's up to them. It's their own record keeping--just so happens that others on GR can usually see some of that record!

Reviews are generally for the reviewer and other readers.  Information about why you didn't finish, why you liked or disliked a book, your favorite parts, things that bothered you--those are all useful to me as a reader, but there is certainly no requirement one way or the other.  It's personal taste. 

In some cases, I will put a star rating (usually on GR, although I used to use shelfari as well) and I'll put private notes so that I can recall something about the book or recall why I hated it or loved it.  

Sometimes I have time to write a full review, sometimes I don't.  When I read reviews, I understand that others are probably in the same boat, and I read reviews with a pretty open mind.  

Ultimately you own the review.  Do what you like!!!


----------



## MyraScott (Jul 18, 2014)

I don't think fair has much to do with it.

A book is published.  Various sites invite opinions about that book. People give their opinions.  Unless there is a published list of rules you must meet to post a review, then any review is fair.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

As a consumer of book reviews, all I'm really interested in is that you tell me _why_ you didn't finish it. When I'm not immediately sure if I want to read a book, I like to skim through some of the negative reviews, even if the large majority are high ratings, as I like to see if there is a pattern among those lesser ratings concerning something that I also tend to find annoying in books. "DNF, just couldn't get into it" doesn't help me much.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

It's perfectly fair. 

Just as it would be fair to write a review of a box of cornflakes you bought that were stale or had bugs. As soon as you notice there's a problem, you'd stop eating them. 

Or printer ink that dried up after printing a half dozen pages -- in that case you couldn't even finish using it. It's defective.

In all cases, to you, the item has disappointed you and if you write a review to explain why, that's perfectly reasonable.

When I'm looking at reviews, the ones that say 'why' the rating is given are 'helpful' to me. Otherwise, they're not. And I'll mark them as such.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Absolutely nothing wrong with it.  I would say it's no different than buying any other type of product and discovering you didn't like it or couldn't use it for whatever reason.


----------



## anguabell (Jan 9, 2011)

I have never reviewed a book I didn't finish, but it's simply my preference because I have a bit of "benefit of the doubt" obsession in general. 
Aside from that, I think it is reasonable, as long as, as Ann points out, the reviewer explains why. Such reviews can be really helpful. Especially because many authors have learned the trick of the "attractive sample" (and other marketing tricks - I don't like being tricked into anything). After a promising beginning, things can go downhill pretty fast, and sometimes you might find you are suddenly reading an entirely different book.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot (Apr 10, 2014)

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Absolutely nothing wrong with it. I would say it's no different than buying any other type of product and discovering you didn't like it or couldn't use it for whatever reason.


Yep, that's how I feel about it.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

I do it and I've gotten criticized for it but I stand by my reviews of DNF books. If I hated a book enough to stop reading it, I have the right to say WHY I hated it so much I stopped reading it, regardless of how far into the book I got. I've been criticized for not giving a book a fair chance when I stopped reading after 30-some pages. But my argument is that this should speak volumes to just how bad I thought those 30-some pages were.

As long as a DNF is disclosed as DNF and one isn't pretending to have finished a book they didn't, I don't see anything wrong with it.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

If an author gets their pants in a twist over a review,  that is not the reviewer's problem.  Your opinion is valid.    Now I usually reserve DNF for non fiction and give the reason.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Absolutely fine. DNF, based on sample, all good.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

cinisajoy said:


> If an author gets their pants in a twist over a review, that is not the reviewer's problem. Your opinion is valid. Now I usually reserve DNF for non fiction and give the reason.


It wasn't the author, just another reader who liked the book.


----------



## DK Mok (Jan 3, 2015)

I think that as long as you have the DNF disclaimer, then that's fine. I agree with NogDog that it's also really helpful if you're able to give details about why you didn't finish the book. You shouldn't force yourself to finish reading a book that you're not enjoying, and you're entitled to share your opinion about what you've read. Like crebel said, it's about helping other readers make a decision


----------



## alawston (Jun 3, 2012)

If I hated a book so much that I couldn't bear to finish it, that would be a rare event indeed and I would feel it was my duty to warn as many fellow readers as possible. And if the author felt this was in any way unfair, my scorn would be _withering_.


----------



## John F (May 19, 2014)

If you're reviewing a book for publication and getting paid for your review, then of course you must read it all, or you aren't earning your pay - fairness aside. But for unsolicited free comments in a forum like this, or perhaps on amazon.com, where others can post their opinions on an equal footing with yours, I've no problem. It's best that the commenter says she/he didn't finish the book and why; this in itself can be a critical judgment. But as long as the comments are an honest opinion as far as they go, fine with me.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

history_lover said:


> It wasn't the author, just another reader who liked the book.


Opinion of the DNF is still valid even if another reader calls you names.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

John F said:


> If you're reviewing a book for publication and getting paid for your review, then of course you must read it all, or you aren't earning your pay - fairness aside. But for unsolicited free comments in a forum like this, or perhaps on amazon.com, where others can post their opinions on an equal footing with yours, I've no problem. It's best that the commenter says she/he didn't finish the book and why; this in itself can be a critical judgment. But as long as the comments are an honest opinion as far as they go, fine with me.


If one is getting paid, that review better be in the editorial review section. 
We are talking about reader reviews where we bought or acquired the book on our own.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

Perhaps part of the problem here is that so much junk gets published on Kindle that readers get frustrated. But if a writer has taken the trouble to put a book through several drafts, shouldn't you give him/her the benefit of the doubt before rushing to pass judgement?

I can think of several very famous books -- the first Harry Potter one, _Interview with a Vampire_ -- where I wasn't convinced I was reading anything good until a fair way in. I can also think of several bestselling novelists I've read until the penultimate chapter, found myself not really caring what the ending is and tossed the book into the nearest corner. But I keep it to myself. Someone else might thoroughly enjoy what I've rejected.

I've never in my life reviewed a book I haven't read from start to finish, even if I've had to grit my teeth to do it. Novels aren't 'product.' they are an attempt at art. Even if it is an unsuccessful attempt, how can you show the author such disrespect as to dismiss him/her with some tacky DNF disclaimer?


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Maybe because its not all about the author? Has nothing to do with disrespect. I buy a book, I read it. If I only get to 40 pages, I can say so why. Not the authors business anymore at that point really. I bought it, its mine to interpret and experience with my own emotions. 

Its not tacky, its an opinion. Like all reviews are. An opinion. An experience that that particular reader had. Its valid and that is really it.


----------



## stevene9 (Nov 9, 2008)

As long as you clearly state that you only read x% of the book before putting it down, it is completely fair.

Steve


----------



## intinst (Dec 23, 2008)

Tony Richards said:


> Perhaps part of the problem here is that so much junk gets published on Kindle that readers get frustrated. But if a writer has taken the trouble to put a book through several drafts, shouldn't you give him/her the benefit of the doubt before rushing to pass judgement?
> 
> I can think of several very famous books -- the first Harry Potter one, _Interview with a Vampire_ -- where I wasn't convinced I was reading anything good until a fair way in. I can also think of several bestselling novelists I've read until the penultimate chapter, found myself not really caring what the ending is and tossed the book into the nearest corner. But I keep it to myself. Someone else might thoroughly enjoy what I've rejected.
> 
> I've never in my life reviewed a book I haven't read from start to finish, even if I've had to grit my teeth to do it. Novels aren't 'product.' they are an attempt at art. Even if it is an unsuccessful attempt, how can you show the author such disrespect as to dismiss him/her with some tacky DNF disclaimer?


I've walked out of concerts that I've paid a good price because I thought I wanted to hear it. Turned out I was wrong. I thought the "artist" stunk. I told everyone I met afterwords how bad it was to me. Didn't see why I "owed" the artist to stick around and I asked for my money back. Didn't get it, but I tried. If I buy a book I can't read for what ever reason, you better believe I'll rate it as I see fit, even if I don't ask for a refund. It isn't a matter of disrespect. A review is about my experience with a book or other performance, not something I am doing to help a writer get his book into a better ad placement. It is for other readers and nothing to do for the author. You can review your way and I'll continue to review mine.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

Yeah, okay, I can see the point. Maybe 'disrespect' is the wrong word ... it's your dime, after all. But I've -- for instance -- walked out of movies, then tried watching  them again a few years later on TV and it turns out I was wrong. If I'd stuck around a little longer, I'd have had my opinion changed. Unless they genuinely stink from the outset, I try to stick with books at least until the two-thirds mark for the same reason.


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

Tony Richards said:


> Perhaps part of the problem here is that so much junk gets published on Kindle that readers get frustrated. But if a writer has taken the trouble to put a book through several drafts, shouldn't you give him/her the benefit of the doubt before rushing to pass judgement?
> 
> I can think of several very famous books -- the first Harry Potter one, _Interview with a Vampire_ -- where I wasn't convinced I was reading anything good until a fair way in. I can also think of several bestselling novelists I've read until the penultimate chapter, found myself not really caring what the ending is and tossed the book into the nearest corner. But I keep it to myself. Someone else might thoroughly enjoy what I've rejected.
> 
> I've never in my life reviewed a book I haven't read from start to finish, even if I've had to grit my teeth to do it. Novels aren't 'product.' they are an attempt at art. Even if it is an unsuccessful attempt, how can you show the author such disrespect as to dismiss him/her with some tacky DNF disclaimer?





Tony Richards said:


> Yeah, okay, I can see the point. Maybe 'disrespect' is the wrong word ... it's your dime, after all. But I've -- for instance -- walked out of movies, then tried watching them again a few years later on TV and it turns out I was wrong. If I'd stuck around a little longer, I'd have had my opinion changed. Unless they genuinely stink from the outset, I try to stick with books at least until the two-thirds mark for the same reason.


Personally, I object to your use of both the word disrespectful and tacky. Especially when in your first post you acknowledge, "Perhaps part of the problem here is that so much junk gets published on Kindle that readers get frustrated." If I have spent my money and time on even a portion of a book that I subjectively qualify as junk, then I reserve the right to tell others why I think so. Someone else has the right to express an entirely different opinion on the same portion or the entirety of the book.

Maybe there are "artists" out there that are being disrespectful of readers by publishing "junk" and being tacky by expecting them to spend their time and money but giving them a pass by not writing an honest of review of substandard work because we couldn't get past the first chapter or two.

Why keep your opinion to yourself when you think a book is bad at even only 10% in by whatever subjective criteria are your own? The thing you think is subjectively bad may be the exact reason I want to read something.


----------



## Daniel Harvell (Jun 21, 2013)

A book review, by definition, is a form of literary criticism in which a book is analyzed based on content, style, and merit. A book review can be a primary source opinion piece, summary review or scholarly review. 

It's hard to review a book's content if you haven't read all of the content; but that said, if the style and/or merit is preventing you from getting through the content in its entirety, a reviewer has every right to share his or her reasons why that happened.


----------



## Tuttle (Jun 10, 2010)

I think its also worth mentioning that people get useful information from low reviews about why they might like a book. What someone else might not be able to finish, might be something that another person would enjoy and seek out. 

When it comes to reviewing for readers it seems to me the point is mostly to share why you liked or didn't like it. Not being able to finish it is relevant, should be shared, and should be reviewed. It does give information to others. But it also gives information to others for both why they might want to read it and why they might not just like other negative reviews. It's not saying "this is the worst book don't read it", if its a useful review. It's saying "I didn't like it, this is why, and I was unable to finish it because I disliked it so much."

I've read DNF reviews that made me sure I was getting a book; if those were the reasons people disliked books, then they weren't things that bothered me. I've read 5 star reviews that made me sure I wasn't.

I absolutely think that DNF reviews should be given. I think that they should say more than that you weren't able to finish, or what you say it no use to anyone. However, at the same time, it is really helpful to know that people weren't able to finish, and why.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Daniel Harvell said:


> A book review, by definition, is a form of literary criticism in which a book is analyzed based on content, style, and merit. A book review can be a primary source opinion piece, summary review or scholarly review.
> 
> It's hard to review a book's content if you haven't read all of the content; but that said, if the style and/or merit is preventing you from getting through the content in its entirety, a reviewer has every right to share his or her reasons why that happened.


Are you saying I should finish a book that has obvious errors? 
A review is not literary criticism. It is an opinion of a person that spent their hard earned money and they have every right to say I wouldn't spend my money on this book because of whatever.
If you get a half raw pizza, would you eat all of it before complaining.?


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Daniel Harvell said:


> A book review, by definition, is a form of literary criticism in which a book is analyzed based on content, style, and merit. A book review can be a primary source opinion piece, summary review or scholarly review.
> 
> It's hard to review a book's content if you haven't read all of the content; but that said, if the style and/or merit is preventing you from getting through the content in its entirety, a reviewer has every right to share his or her reasons why that happened.


You're confusing literary reviews with product reviews, which is an honest mistake, but a mistake nonetheless. The book critic gets paid--again, *paid*--to read and comment on books he's received for free. Consumers pay for the books they read out of their own pockets, and no one pays them to read books. Think about it for a moment. You're implying that someone who's spent money on a book has an obligation to finish that book before writing a review of it; so not only did he waste his money, but now he's expected to waste his time reading something he doesn't enjoy and has paid for.

The bit about reviewing all the content, by the way, is a beside the point. No one reviews "all" the content of any book. I've reviewed a non-fiction textbook based on the first chapter before. I felt justified because there's no recovering from bad premises--that's just a logical implication. Sure, the authors may provided some good material later on, but I didn't claim they didn't.



Tony Richards said:


> Perhaps part of the problem here is that so much junk gets published on Kindle that readers get frustrated. But if a writer has taken the trouble to put a book through several drafts, shouldn't you give him/her the benefit of the doubt before rushing to pass judgement?
> 
> I can think of several very famous books -- the first Harry Potter one, _Interview with a Vampire_ -- where I wasn't convinced I was reading anything good until a fair way in. I can also think of several bestselling novelists I've read until the penultimate chapter, found myself not really caring what the ending is and tossed the book into the nearest corner. But I keep it to myself. Someone else might thoroughly enjoy what I've rejected.
> 
> I've never in my life reviewed a book I haven't read from start to finish, even if I've had to grit my teeth to do it. Novels aren't 'product.' they are an attempt at art. Even if it is an unsuccessful attempt, how can you show the author such disrespect as to dismiss him/her with some tacky DNF disclaimer?


You seem to be disagreeing with yourself. You say readers should finish books because novels are attempts at art, not products. Yet you acknowledge in the first line of your post that a lot of junk gets published. If that junk isn't made up of attempts at art, what's the problem with not finishing it before reviewing it? Would it be tacky to quit reading a recycled public domain book too?


----------



## Marie Long (Jan 11, 2014)

I try to find at least one redeeming quality of the book, even though I may not like the story overall. I try to be as detailed as I can in my reviews, providing adequate examples to justify why I liked/disliked the story.



Tuttle said:


> I think its also worth mentioning that people get useful information from low reviews about why they might like a book. What someone else might not be able to finish, might be something that another person would enjoy and seek out.
> 
> When it comes to reviewing for readers it seems to me the point is mostly to share why you liked or didn't like it. Not being able to finish it is relevant, should be shared, and should be reviewed. It does give information to others. But it also gives information to others for both why they might want to read it and why they might not just like other negative reviews. It's not saying "this is the worst book don't read it", if its a useful review. It's saying "I didn't like it, this is why, and I was unable to finish it because I disliked it so much."
> 
> ...


I tend to read the negative reviews first before I read the positive ones. The negative ones tend to have a lot more information that I want to know about. For example, whether or not the book is a serial and/or contains cliffhangers. I dislike serials, and REALLY hate cliffhanger endings, and many times, authors won't disclose this information in the book description, so I end up discovering a nasty surprise. If a lot of the negative reviews are saying the same thing, then that's an automatic red flag for me. I may or may not check out the book at that point.

Yes, I'll also see those single-sentence 1-star reviews, but I completely ignore those.

5-star reviews can be misleading sometimes, also. But I will only check the positive reviews once I'm thoroughly convinced the negative reviews are nothing but people complaining about little stupid things or people being extremely picky about things that I can forgive while reading.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Tony Richards said:


> Perhaps part of the problem here is that so much junk gets published on Kindle that readers get frustrated. But if a writer has taken the trouble to put a book through several drafts, shouldn't you give him/her the benefit of the doubt before rushing to pass judgement?
> 
> I can think of several very famous books -- the first Harry Potter one, _Interview with a Vampire_ -- where I wasn't convinced I was reading anything good until a fair way in. I can also think of several bestselling novelists I've read until the penultimate chapter, found myself not really caring what the ending is and tossed the book into the nearest corner. But I keep it to myself. Someone else might thoroughly enjoy what I've rejected.
> 
> I've never in my life reviewed a book I haven't read from start to finish, even if I've had to grit my teeth to do it. Novels aren't 'product.' they are an attempt at art. Even if it is an unsuccessful attempt, how can you show the author such disrespect as to dismiss him/her with some tacky DNF disclaimer?


Art is still product. As a photographer, I know and accept that. People are entitled to have and express opinions about art whether they consumed it in entirety or not. Have you never listened to a song or watched a movie and knew that you hated it before it was finished? Life it too short to read bad books. I'm not going to waste hours of reading something I am not enjoying. I read for pleasure so if it's not pleasurable, why read it? It's not about the author, it's MY time and MY money and if I want to express the fact that I feel like I wasted my time and money on something I didn't even enjoy enough to finish, why shouldn't I?


----------



## Brownskins (Nov 18, 2011)

Tony Richards said:


> But if a writer has taken the trouble to put a book through several drafts, shouldn't you give him/her the benefit of the doubt before rushing to pass judgement?
> 
> I've never in my life reviewed a book I haven't read from start to finish, even if I've had to grit my teeth to do it. Novels aren't 'product.' they are an attempt at art.





Daniel Harvell said:


> A book review, by definition, is a form of literary criticism in which a book is analyzed based on content, style, and merit. It's hard to review a book's content if you haven't read all of the content; but that said, if the style and/or merit is preventing you from getting through the content in its entirety, a reviewer has every right to share his or her reasons why that happened.


I agree with both above. Personally, I do consider a book as an attempt at art and I treat a book review as a form of literary criticism. I put in careful effort to make sure I write helpful reviews for other prospective readers. That being said, except for one particular book, I've always read through a book before writing a review on Amazon. In my review of said book, I put in a disclaimer that I did not get to finish the book (I stopped about 2/3 through) and that I had given myself about 2 months to finish the book, but I just couldn't. I respectfully delineated the reasons why. I believe it was a fair review. And I received several helpful votes for that particular review.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Brownskins said:


> I agree with both above. Personally, I do consider a book as an attempt at art and I treat a book review as a form of literary criticism. I put in careful effort to make sure I write helpful reviews for other prospective readers. That being said, except for one particular book, I've always read through a book before writing a review on Amazon. In my review of said book, I put in a disclaimer that I did not get to finish the book (I stopped about 2/3 through) and that I had given myself about 2 months to finish the book, but I just couldn't. I respectfully delineated the reasons why. I believe it was a fair review. And I received several helpful votes for that particular review.


Are you talking fiction or non-fiction? And what genres do you like? I would agree some authors are oil paintings, while others just play with finger paints. I personally like both.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

I have some questions for all those objecting to DNF reviews....
do you watch all of a TV show before forming an opinion?
ever walked out of a movie halfway through and then told people how bad it was?

amazon reviews are not literary criticisms.  they are the opinions of readers written for a variety of reasons.  some people feel reviews are for other readers, some people feel they are to help (or unfortunately, sometimes to harm) an author.  

nothing is everything to everyone.  if you don't like DNF reviews, don't read them.  but let others have the right to read them.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Brownskins said:


> I agree with both above. Personally, I do consider a book as an attempt at art and I treat a book review as a form of literary criticism. I put in careful effort to make sure I write helpful reviews for other prospective readers. That being said, except for one particular book, I've always read through a book before writing a review on Amazon. In my review of said book, I put in a disclaimer that I did not get to finish the book (I stopped about 2/3 through) and that I had given myself about 2 months to finish the book, but I just couldn't. I respectfully delineated the reasons why. I believe it was a fair review. And I received several helpful votes for that particular review.


Hm. I do not view most books as "art." Most are "entertainment" or written for such and that does not mean they are "art." Many books are written with a formula/style specifically to sell to a particular audience. That is not a bad thing, but it's also more of a product meeting demand than "art." And besides, even if books are art, they don't get a pass. They are for sale, which makes them products. If a person BUYS a book, they are giving the "Artist" the benefit of the doubt right then and there. They are trying out the product. If it doesn't work in one page, thirty pages or that time in their life, their review is still perfectly valid.

Disrespectful to the writer? They are reviewing the PRODUCT, not the writer. If the review says, "This writer is ugly, has green hair and no fashion sense," it's a review of the writer and disrespectful (probably even if true). But if the review says, "I read four pages and was not entertained. This book didn't ring my bell," that is an opinion about the product and it's still useful information. The idea that in order to be a valid reviewer you need to be paid or have a special education or have a title with a newspaper is bunk. Reviews are opinions. Sometimes those opinions will be flat out misinformed. I've read reviews that were one-star because the reviewer bought a book thinking it was about radioactive dogs and it turned out it was about magical dogs. Well, it's a valid review and anyone reading it can make their own call on how useful it is.

I've reviewed semi-professionally for a site that obtained the books for me for free. I was not paid to do reviews, but the site was a review site with a quota and rules. The preferred review was for books that were finished; this was made clear in the rules. I stopped reviewing for that site because God Help Me, there were too many books I did not want to finish. This was before indie days so had nothing to do with formatting or typos. It did not mean that these books were sludge. But I still had an opinion and expressed it because that is what reviews are FOR.

A smart author will read reviews and glean useful information, even if the review is not written for her. Yes, misinformed or bad reviews hurt "rankings" but so what? On the opposite side of that coin, if an author is very, very lucky, her readers will help market her books by telling other readers. This is a gift, not an obligation. What if someone read four pages and started telling everyone it was a wonderful book? What then? Disrespectful to the author--or disrespectful to potential readers...?


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

I buy a book, or get sent a free copy for review, and I will read as much as I choose (or not) and review (or not). My money, my time, my choice.

I _ask _for a free copy for review and that's a different ballgame. Now I have a moral obligation to finish it and write a constructive review.

I am _paid _for a review (I used to review for a national magazine) and I now have a moral obligation to finish the book and write a positive/balanced review. I can mention things I didn't like but I have to find some good bits to balance it out.


----------



## martyns (May 8, 2014)

DebBennett said:


> I buy a book, or get sent a free copy for review, and I will read as much as I choose (or not) and review (or not). My money, my time, my choice.
> 
> I _ask _for a free copy for review and that's a different ballgame. Now I have a moral obligation to finish it and write a constructive review.
> 
> I am _paid _for a review (I used to review for a national magazine) and I now have a moral obligation to finish the book and write a positive/balanced review. I can mention things I didn't like but I have to find some good bits to balance it out.


I think DebBennett said it perfectly. I would suggest that if you've been given a free ebook to review then it changes the dynamic slightly. There's a cost involved in providing someone with a paperback, but none in providing an ebook. I do think if you DNF you should say that you didn't and perhaps try to say why you didn't. It isn't a rule though. I think the best reviews are the ones which guide more people who will like it to buy AND those who WON'T like it to avoid. As an author you don't really want your book landing in front of someone who is highly unlikely to like it. That doesn't help anyone!


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

As long as the reviewer reads a decent fraction of the book (how much a decent fraction is is another question), and explains why they stopped, I'm totally supportive of it. In fact, I am going to do this for an unfinished book if I ever get around to finishing my 2013 books thread!

Other than a handful of Vine reviews, I've not done reviews of books I was given free for a review, and I've never done reviews for pay, so I shan't go there...but I wonder if people speaking about an obligation to finish before reviewing those books feel that way about books that are offered free to everyone as a promotion?


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

The Hooded Claw said:


> As long as the reviewer reads a decent fraction of the book (how much a decent fraction is is another question), and explains why they stopped, I'm totally supportive of it. In fact, I am going to do this for an unfinished book if I ever get around to finishing my 2013 books thread!
> 
> Other than a handful of Vine reviews, I've not done reviews of books I was given free for a review, and I've never done reviews for pay, so I shan't go there...but I wonder if people speaking about an obligation to finish before reviewing those books feel that way about books that are offered free to everyone as a promotion?


Nope. But then I don't think there is an obligation even if you asked for the book to review. Why? Because I've reviewed. And if I choose not to review a book, you probably don't want me to review the book. I've asked for and not reviewed some books I never finished. Had I reviewed those books, the review would have indicated DNF and I hated it. Perhaps even Loathed it. I try to be fair. I try to find something I like, but sometimes I'm really not in the mood to think of something nice to say. So it's best if I say nothing at all rather than just spew my gut reaction.

I used to try to review the freebies. But there are so many of them I feel no obligation to review them anymore. Sometimes I still do review the standouts, but in all honesty I probably only finish 1 in 20 and don't pay attention to which were free and which were not.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

MariaESchneider said:


> Nope. But then I don't think there is an obligation even if you asked for the book to review. Why? Because I've reviewed. And if I choose not to review a book, you probably don't want me to review the book. I've asked for and not reviewed some books I never finished. Had I reviewed those books, the review would have indicated DNF and I hated it. Perhaps even Loathed it. I try to be fair. I try to find something I like, but sometimes I'm really not in the mood to think of something nice to say. So it's best if I say nothing at all rather than just spew my gut reaction.
> 
> I used to try to review the freebies. But there are so many of them I feel no obligation to review them anymore. Sometimes I still do review the standouts, but in all honesty I probably only finish 1 in 20 and don't pay attention to which were free and which were not.


This. 
Now if I have been asked to review a book and it would be negative stars, I do let the author know that I cannot review the book.
Most of the time, those are for authors I had reviewed before.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

Last year, I tried an experiment and started reviewing every book I started reading and those reviews on both Goodreads and Amazon.  It lasted 3 months and some change before I gave up.  In that period, I read or at least started a mix of indie, small-publisher and large publisher books and    On Amazon, anything I didn't finish seemed to attract the Review Police who were always quick to point out that it's against some rule of theirs to review anything unfinished.  Apparently someone has decided there are rules.

I agree that a review on Amazon is a product review and not a literary criticism.  If that were the case, then the review section for books would have much higher minimum word requirements and probably wouldn't work the same as a review for batteries or trousers.  There is a place for lit crit but I doubt that Amazon is that place....


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

AlbertB said:


> I hope this doesn't create a s**%*storm, but I think it's a fair topic. If I don't like a book to the point I can't finish it, I still believe that it deserves a review just as the ones I like do. If the book is well written, just not for me, I give it 3-4 stars. However, I always put in a disclaimer stating that I did not finish the book and listing how far I got through it before giving up-thanks Kindle for tracking that for me! If the book is truly horrid-plotting, grammar, typos-then I still put in the disclaimer, but give it a lesser review. I feel that, if I've purchased a book, then I have the right to give an honest review. Thoughts?


Of course you have that right. I don't do it because I'm too lazy. I have to feel something about a book in order to review. If a book doesn't grab my attention, I just figure it's me and move onto the next book. I've only left bad reviews on books that I feel are out to cheat people, like those scam booklets that are seven pages long and meant to scam KU. I also left one recently on a book I thought was incredibly irresponsible in that it advised people to toss their asthma inhalers because they could cure their asthma naturally. Then I skimmed the book and it was clear the author had only done minimal research into asthma and treatments.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

I once left a review saying be careful with the advice in this book and where are your sources.


----------



## Daniel Harvell (Jun 21, 2013)

cinisajoy said:


> Are you saying I should finish a book that has obvious errors?
> A review is not literary criticism. It is an opinion of a person that spent their hard earned money and they have every right to say I wouldn't spend my money on this book because of whatever.
> If you get a half raw pizza, would you eat all of it before complaining.?


I don't think you read my full statement. I said "... if the style and/or merit is preventing you from getting through the content in its entirety, a reviewer has every right to share his or her reasons why that happened." I clearly state that it's okay to not make it through a book and to list your reasons why in a review. Don't know how that could have been interpreted as me saying you HAVE to read it all.


----------



## Daniel Harvell (Jun 21, 2013)

WHDean said:


> You're confusing literary reviews with product reviews, which is an honest mistake, but a mistake nonetheless. The book critic gets paid--again, *paid*--to read and comment on books he's received for free. Consumers pay for the books they read out of their own pockets, and no one pays them to read books. Think about it for a moment. You're implying that someone who's spent money on a book has an obligation to finish that book before writing a review of it; so not only did he waste his money, but now he's expected to waste his time reading something he doesn't enjoy and has paid for.
> 
> The bit about reviewing all the content, by the way, is a beside the point. No one reviews "all" the content of any book. I've reviewed a non-fiction textbook based on the first chapter before. I felt justified because there's no recovering from bad premises--that's just a logical implication. Sure, the authors may provided some good material later on, but I didn't claim they didn't.


I simply gave the definition of a literary review, but never implied one has to finish a book to review - in fact, I flat out state that they don't have to!

And I also never said that a person should review "all" of the content of a book - I refer to READING "all" of the content of a book, but not REVIEWING "all" of it.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Daniel Harvell said:


> I don't think you read my full statement. I said "... if the style and/or merit is preventing you from getting through the content in its entirety, a reviewer has every right to share his or her reasons why that happened." I clearly state that it's okay to not make it through a book and to list your reasons why in a review. Don't know how that could have been interpreted as me saying you HAVE to read it all.


Hello. I think I understand our misunderstanding. It stems from you saying a review is literary criticism. So I think many of us missed your second paragraph. That is how. 
Oh and if it is a style problem that keeps me from reading the book, I don't review it. The only style I don't really care for is switching POV'S and locations every chapter. To me, it feels like I am reading two separate books.


----------



## Guest (Jan 20, 2015)

Tony Richards said:


> Yeah, okay, I can see the point. Maybe 'disrespect' is the wrong word ... it's your dime, after all. But I've -- for instance -- walked out of movies, then tried watching them again a few years later on TV and it turns out I was wrong. If I'd stuck around a little longer, I'd have had my opinion changed. Unless they genuinely stink from the outset, I try to stick with books at least until the two-thirds mark for the same reason.


I wouldn't say you were wrong. I would say your tastes may have changed, or you were in a different frame of mind at the time. That wouldn't make your previous review wrong in any way. It would just mean the older You would disagree with the younger You.

What you are describing is a common phenomena. Our opinions change. Movies I enjoyed when I was a teenager don't interest me now. Movies I couldn't stomach when I was younger I find interesting now. We aren't static creatures. We evolve. So I wouldn't say your opinion _at the time_ would have changed if you read the entire book. It simply did not suit you at the time.


----------



## 67499 (Feb 4, 2013)

I agree that the reason why a reviewer couldn't finish reading a book can be important to potential readers. But I can't write that kind of review. If a book doesn't interest me or isn't worth reading, I don't feel like taking the time to review it. I want to promote books I think good and can't review a book that doesn't _work for me_.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

I think it depends on _why _you stopped reading. I just stopped reading a book after about four chapters for no other reason that I didn't like the writing style. There was nothing wrong with the book, and it sounded like a good plot with decent characters, but I wasn't enjoying it. I don't think it would have been fair to review it. 
However, if I had given up because of poor writing, typos, dreadful grammar etc I think it would have been fair to warn other readers by leaving a review.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> I think it depends on _why _you stopped reading. I just stopped reading a book after about four chapters for no other reason that I didn't like the writing style. There was nothing wrong with the book, and it sounded like a good plot with decent characters, but I wasn't enjoying it. I don't think it would have been fair to review it.
> However, if I had given up because of poor writing, typos, dreadful grammar etc I think it would have been fair to warn other readers by leaving a review.


I think this is again one of the difference between many regular readers and those that are writers of sorts. I am not qualified to comment on poor writing. I just am not. Grammar, I'll pick up mostly, maybe, typos probably not. Writing? I have no clue. And if I feel something off, I wouldn't be able to put a finger on it what it is as I just have no clue about the technicalities of writing.

So for me and I bet many regular readers, its about how we liked a book. What you would call writing style, for me it would be just not liking the book. I wouldn't be able to put my finger on it. So every review I do is only based on how the book made me feel. Assuming typo/grammar isn't noticeable to me. So if I read a book and I have to stop after 4 chapters, I can still write a review. I might have not liked the characters, or the setting, or something else. I might just not have liked it. Sometimes I just don't have more words that that. I didn't like it.

So the word fair doesn't ever play into it for me. I read or attempt to read a book and I write down if I liked it or not. 
If I am not enjoying a book it means, in that moment it time, for me the individual reader, there was something wrong with the book. That is really all reviews are saying if they are lower stars. Something didn't work for me, the book didn't work for me, the book wasn't enjoyable to me. I just recently gave a 1.5 star to a book that many of my reading friends raved about with 4-5 stars. I hated it. My opinion of the book does not their opinion invalid, just like their loving the book, does not make my opinion invalid. I just didn't like it, so I rated it low. They liked it, so rated it high. Same coin, just different sides.

That is really all there is to it in many cases. I barely managed to finish that book by the way, technically I jumped through sections just to get it over with, so it was partly a DNF one could say. Reading all the words would not have changed my rating or my non liking of the book.


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

Atunah said:


> I think this is again one of the difference between many regular readers and those that are writers of sorts. I am not qualified to comment on poor writing. I just am not. Grammar, I'll pick up mostly, maybe, typos probably not. Writing? I have no clue. And if I feel something off, I wouldn't be able to put a finger on it what it is as I just have no clue about the technicalities of writing.
> 
> So for me and I bet many regular readers, its about how we liked a book. What you would call writing style, for me it would be just not liking the book. I wouldn't be able to put my finger on it. So every review I do is only based on how the book made me feel. Assuming typo/grammar isn't noticeable to me. So if I read a book and I have to stop after 4 chapters, I can still write a review. I might have not liked the characters, or the setting, or something else. I might just not have liked it. Sometimes I just don't have more words that that. I didn't like it.
> 
> ...


Here's a further twist. Even though I could identify all those things you couldn't, I wouldn't bother doing it because I don't feel a moral obligation to warn people about the menace of typos and bad style. Like you, I'd be more inclined to write a review if the book lost my attention.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> I think it depends on _why _you stopped reading. I just stopped reading a book after about four chapters for no other reason that I didn't like the writing style. There was nothing wrong with the book, and it sounded like a good plot with decent characters, but I wasn't enjoying it. I don't think it would have been fair to review it.
> However, if I had given up because of poor writing, typos, dreadful grammar etc I think it would have been fair to warn other readers by leaving a review.


That actually sounds exactly like a review to me: "I just stopped reading this book after about four chapters for no other reason that I didn't like the writing style. There was nothing wrong with the book, and it sounded like a good plot with decent characters, but I wasn't enjoying it."

Especially if you elaborated on what it was about the writing style you didn't like - that's exactly what a review is for, if you ask me! Writing style is one of the many elements I critique when reviewing book so if you have something to say about it, why not review it? Someone else reading the review might feel the same way about the writing style and be grateful for your review. A review is a place to express your opinion on something so if you have an opinion about the writing style, say so! Since when are reviews supposed to be only about technical qualities like grammar?

There is nothing "unfair" about expressing a opinion, if you ask me.


----------



## Daniel Harvell (Jun 21, 2013)

history_lover said:


> There is nothing "unfair" about expressing a opinion, if you ask me.


Literature is art, which elicits more varied opinions than most other subjects. Thank goodness we all have opinions on art - what a boring world it would be if we all liked the same stuff!


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

history_lover said:


> That actually sounds exactly like a review to me: "I just stopped reading this book after about four chapters for no other reason that I didn't like the writing style. There was nothing wrong with the book, and it sounded like a good plot with decent characters, but I wasn't enjoying it."
> 
> Especially if you elaborated on what it was about the writing style you didn't like - that's exactly what a review is for, if you ask me! Writing style is one of the many elements I critique when reviewing book so if you have something to say about it, why not review it? Someone else reading the review might feel the same way about the writing style and be grateful for your review. A review is a place to express your opinion on something so if you have an opinion about the writing style, say so! Since when are reviews supposed to be only about technical qualities like grammar?
> 
> There is nothing "unfair" about expressing a opinion, if you ask me.


Somebody might notice a review like that, check the sample more closely and realise they *love* that quirky writing style...


----------



## lmroth12 (Nov 15, 2012)

I think it's fair as long as you state that you didn't finish the book, and how far into it you read. Once or twice in my life I read a book that made absolutely no sense until nearly the end, and therefore had to go back and read it again to see what the author was doing that I missed. Abstract thinkers can really confuse you!

As for myself, I have stated more than once on Kboards that I have (gasp!) NEVER FINISHED* Moby Dick*, although a few readers have tried to convince me that it is the greatest book they ever read.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

It occurs to me that if I never reviewed books I didn't finish, then I would never leave reviews for bad books, because I have better things to do with my time than read obviously (to me, anyway) bad books to the end. It has to be at least mediocre for me to finish it, and even then, I might not if there's something that looks better waiting in the wings.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

NogDog said:


> It occurs to me that if I never reviewed books I didn't finish, then I would never leave reviews for bad books, because I have better things to do with my time than read obviously (to me, anyway) bad books to the end. It has to be at least mediocre for me to finish it, and even then, I might not if there's something that looks better waiting in the wings.


I feel similarly - I tend to reserve 1 star ratings for books that were so bad I couldn't finish them. So if I didn't rate/review books I didn't finish, I'd rarely give any books 1 star reviews! How convenient for authors, lol...


----------



## SQS1 (Jan 15, 2015)

As an author, I would like to say no it is not fair. But that is not true. However, I would also like to add please put DNF in the review, also if you have requested the author to provide you a book to review, then u must read the entire book. I would also add to that, before you ask to review a book, read the book description, and the authors bio on the author page, or their Goodreads profile. Don't ask to review a book, that is written by an author who's genre is outside of you comfort zone, or conflicts with your beliefs. It is hard to write a fair review, when you are reading a work of fiction, that's premise is against your personal beliefs.

Thank You D. D.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

SQS1 said:


> As an author, I would like to say no it is not fair. But that is not true. However, I would also like to add please put DNF in the review, also if you have requested the author to provide you a book to review, then u must read the entire book. I would also add to that, before you ask to review a book, read the book description, and the authors bio on the author page, or their Goodreads profile. Don't ask to review a book, that is written by an author who's genre is outside of you comfort zone, or conflicts with your beliefs. It is hard to write a fair review, when you are reading a work of fiction, that's premise is against your personal beliefs.
> 
> Thank You D. D.


I probably already said this, but from my standpoint, if you are a regular reviewer, go ahead and request a book and either review it or don't, at your discretion, preference, timeline, ability and so on. I say regular reviewer, and by that I mean, someone who reviews anywhere on a regular basis. I say that to differentiate from the reader who requests many many books and never reviews any of them--because yes there are really people who bother to "scam" around author sites looking for books, requesting them and never reviewing any of them. It helps if you are requesting a book to say, "I regularly review FILL IN BLANK" which is what I do when requesting a copy. I always mention that I may not review every book I receive because I don't. I Do NOT guarantee a good review before, during or after the request. I do not guarantee that I'll even read the book, but if I've requested it, I usually have sampled it (I don't put that in the email though.)

I've been on both ends of the review train so I well understand just about all the options. In short: It's a crap shoot.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

SQS1 said:


> As an author, I would like to say no it is not fair. But that is not true. However, I would also like to add please put DNF in the review, also if you have requested the author to provide you a book to review, then u must read the entire book. I would also add to that, before you ask to review a book, read the book description, and the authors bio on the author page, or their Goodreads profile. Don't ask to review a book, that is written by an author who's genre is outside of you comfort zone, or conflicts with your beliefs. It is hard to write a fair review, when you are reading a work of fiction, that's premise is against your personal beliefs.
> 
> Thank You D. D.


I don't request books to review. However, several authors have offered me books to review. I make sure those I say yes to either get an opinion or a review.


----------



## shaunduke (Feb 2, 2015)

Personally, I find reviewers who don't mention books they didn't like a bit suspect.  A review of a bad book is just as useful as a review of a good book.  On occasion, I will review a book I haven't finished if I feel that the reasons for failing to finish it were based solely on the quality of the book and not some other factor (life, etc.).  It doesn't happen often; when it does, I think it perfectly fair to say why I couldn't finish the book, because it's likely I stopped reading because that book failed so badly from the start that no amount of writing success in later chapters could save it from being terrible.

The bigger issue, I think, are people who review books they haven't actually read or didn't bother to really try.  If you stop after 5 pages, it better be because the book was written so poorly you couldn't keep reading (I've had this happen once).  Otherwise, I really think you should do your best to get to the 1/3 mark so you have a good sense of the writer's style, the flow of the novel, etc.


----------



## Pikko (Oct 21, 2014)

I reviewed a book once where I completely blasted it for its inaccuracies and inappropriate content and I didn't read the whole thing because I refused to waste more of my life reading it. And yet I felt I had a duty to save people money.

It was some "unofficial guide" to The Hunger Games and I did spot read through the whole book. What disgusted me what that it was being pitched as a great book for all fans of The Hunger Games (which, let's face it, includes kids as young as 10) and yet some of the content included details on how best to spear someone to kill them. There was another chapter that talked about what happens to a person's eyeballs when they're electrocuted in a electric chair execution. It was gory and horrifying and way over the line. Sure, people were tortured in the HG books, but that doesn't mean you should give graphic details and then go tell everyone it makes a great gift for kids!


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Pikko said:


> I reviewed a book once where I completely blasted it for its inaccuracies and inappropriate content and I didn't read the whole thing because I refused to waste more of my life reading it. And yet I felt I had a duty to save people money.
> 
> It was some "unofficial guide" to The Hunger Games and I did spot read through the whole book. What disgusted me what that it was being pitched as a great book for all fans of The Hunger Games (which, let's face it, includes kids as young as 10) and yet some of the content included details on how best to spear someone to kill them. There was another chapter that talked about what happens to a person's eyeballs when they're electrocuted in a electric chair execution. It was gory and horrifying and way over the line. Sure, people were tortured in the HG books, but that doesn't mean you should give graphic details and then go tell everyone it makes a great gift for kids!


Most children/young adult books are intended for readers the same age as the main character. For example, Harry Potter is 11 in the first book so the books are intended to be for kids 11+. I've never read Hunger Games but apparently the main character is 16 in the first book so it's really intended to be for teens, not kids. This is according to my sis in law who has two masters in teaching/child education. I'm not saying 10 year olds don't read Hunger Games, maybe they do - I wouldn't know. I'm just suggesting that perhaps the author of the unofficial guide was assuming the series is not appropriate for 10 year olds and therefore saying the guide is great for all fans of it equally does not include children.


----------



## Pikko (Oct 21, 2014)

I went to go look at it on Amazon and it says "For ages 12-18, Grades 7 and up."

"For all those who adore Katniss and Peeta, and can't get enough, this companion guide to the wildly popular Hunger Games series is a must-read and a terrific gift."

Either way, I don't think some of the content I read was appropriate even for me, and I was like 31 at the time. It was just outright disgusting. -->


Spoiler



(the book described how when people are electrocuted in the chair, their eyeballs pop out and fall on their cheeks)



I hadn't gone to look at it on Amazon in a while, and thank goodness it's got only 2 1/2 stars. After I'd posted my review, tons of anonymous "13 and under" 5 star reviews started popping up that wrote in perfect scholarly English. I think Amazon eventually removed them though.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Pikko said:


> I went to go look at it on Amazon and it says "For ages 12-18, Grades 7 and up."
> 
> "For all those who adore Katniss and Peeta, and can't get enough, this companion guide to the wildly popular Hunger Games series is a must-read and a terrific gift."
> 
> ...


I'm older than that and so far as any graphic violence is concerned, I'll never be old enough so I appreciate reviews of the sort you wrote (finished or not finished.) That's what a review is for--to inform and to give an opinion. It won't be "right" or "perfect" for everyone, but that isn't the point of the review!


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Pikko said:


> I went to go look at it on Amazon and it says "For ages 12-18, Grades 7 and up."


Yeah but like I say, that's mostly teenagers, not 10 year olds.



> Either way, I don't think some of the content I read was appropriate even for me, and I was like 31 at the time. It was just outright disgusting. -->
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


Everyone is different, that wouldn't bother me. I'm not that big on gore but I've read gorier stuff than that without issue.


----------



## Pikko (Oct 21, 2014)

Yes, but I felt it was irresponsible for that author and publisher to assume that *every* Hunger Games fan would love a book that contained content like that. That aside though, that wasn't even the only big problem with the book. It had Hunger Games inaccuracies as well as historical inaccuracies.


----------



## anguabell (Jan 9, 2011)

MariaESchneider said:


> I'm older than that and so far as any graphic violence is concerned, I'll never be old enough so I appreciate reviews of the sort you wrote (finished or not finished.) That's what a review is for--to inform and to give an opinion. It won't be "right" or "perfect" for everyone, but that isn't the point of the review!


I completely agree with Maria. I don't think books should necessarily carry warning labels (although that has been proposed, I believe) but I appreciate knowing the book may contain something I'd find difficult to tolerate, or be entertained by. In such case, it's completely irrelevant whether the reviewer actually finished the book or not.


----------

