Why do I write book reviews? What’s the purpose?
I’m not a critic. I don’t have a Masters in English or Shakespeare. I’m not a teacher. I’m not doing this for class credit. I don’t have a book to write dissecting the greatness of Tolstoy or Yates or James Joyce. I don’t have credentials.
Certainly, I spoil things. I don’t follow the “non spoiler” format, a generally accepted version of reviewing material. Are these even book reviews in a commercial sense? Reviews might be seen as intended to help someone form an opinion on a book. I guess I’m closer to analysis and thoughts on the material.
Then why do I write reviews?
It’s not to convince anyone to read the story. I don’t have the kind of influence, nor do I particularly want it.
No, the short version is that these digressions of thought are a conversation. Admittedly, one way, but definitely real.
For some reason, almost every major review I read talks about a fun or significant moment, but the things I want to know are almost never addressed. Reviews frequently speak in grand generality, fearing to delve into detail for fear of spoilers or, quite frankly, lack of interest.
The things that I want to talk about and dissect aren’t popular. And, that’s fine. That’s what people want in a review but it’s certainly not what I want. So, here’s my soap box.
I think a section of the story lagged in the middle? That’s fine. Why did it lag? That’s more important.
Part of this is my attempt to understand what makes an enjoyable story and what makes a good story and what makes a popular story. Make no mistake, none of those of are inherently related.
I write these reviews to talk about the aspects of a book that I want to talk about. Yes, there are spoilers, but this is an opinion. If the story is good enough, spoilers be damned.