For this week's Geek, participants were directed to a post by author Shannon Hale which discussed the process of reviewing books. Based on Hale's comments, we could tackle one of three options: 1) Revisiting a negative review; 2) writing a new review using Hale's questions for reviews; or 3) write a letter to Hale answering one of her questions for reviewers. I've decided to go for the last option.
Ms. Hale,
In your recent blog post, you asked if the process of writing a review changes the way I feel about the book in question. The answer is quite typically yes. Many times I have finished a book with a negative feeling towards it, and in the process of writing a review, found myself appreciating the book more and more. At first blush, this may be an indication of a indefinite personality, a flighty mindset, a wishy-washy wibble-wobbler if you will. But I refuse to accept that.
The process of analyzation can be quite revealing. The best illustration of my point may be with visual art, like a painting. Someone might glance at a Picasso and immediately say "I don't like it". But a closer look, an understanding of what it represents and how it was made, might lead the viewer to not only appreciate the painting more but perhaps even like it - despite the immediate response. Sometimes - not always - this is what happens to me while writing a review.
Maybe it's just that distance makes the heart grow fonder. A bad experience reading may be dulled the more time passes from the reading event itself. This was my experience with Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation. While reading, I was consistently with headache. The concepts, the terminology, were complex and getting through the book was a bit like trudging through an overgrown rosegarden - beauty greets you as the thorns prick and scrape and lodge in your skin. When I first finished that book, I heaved a sigh of relief and entertained serious thoughts of printing a picture of Baudrillard and burning it for fun. As months went by though, I found myself thinking of and verbally referring to ideas presented in the book. I finally wrote a review of the book, and the memory of my pain while reading faded to be replaced with almost fond remembrances of looking up three-penny words and cross-referencing complex concepts to construct the basic logic of the thesis.
Having an opinion on something with no idea how or why you hold that opinion is irresponsible and honestly quite irrelevant. If you can't prove a claim, you have no claim at all. Reviewing a book can most definitely affect how I feel about a book, and I think that is a sign of quality.
Then again, I might just be a wishy-washy wibbler-wobbler.
Yours Truly,
Trisha
I like how you wrote that writing reviews sometimes changes your opinion of a book, especially when you're writing a more negative review. I find that I'm the same way because I am always trying to come up with something positive about a book whereas, before I blogged, I didn't use that technique.
ReplyDeleteI'm with you. On more than one occasion I've found that writing the review and reflecting on what worked and what didn't in a book has changed my impressions of it. I definitely think forcing myself to analyze the "nuts and bolts" of a book, so to speak, helps me to hold my initial gut reaction to a book at arm's length and think more closely about the author's intentions and whether he achieved them by his writing. Neat, huh? :)
ReplyDeleteLola - Analyzing makes me remove myself from the immediate emotion of reading a book and really think about it. It's wonderful, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteMegan - Gut reaction is a really appropriate phrase here; that is exactly what I meant. Definitely neat!
I feel that happens too Trisha. Writing the review often gives me a better appreciation of what the author has achieved.
ReplyDeleteWell written. I sometimes have a hard time writing a negative review (unless I really really didn't like it) because I appreciate that someone went to the trouble to write their story down and that is a lot of work.
ReplyDeleteKerrie - Exactly!
ReplyDeleteKristen - Negative reviews are difficult for me too. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings (like author's are really checking out my blog right?)
Reading is more enhanced for as I review it soon afterwards.
ReplyDeleteLiked your letter!
Weekly Geeks: Reviewing and rating
It's funny you picked painting and postmodernism as your examples. I had a very negative reaction to Mark Rothko until I found out what his paintings represented. (And now I *still* have a very negative reaction to Mark Rothko!)
ReplyDeleteI used to love semiotics and poststructuralist stuff, and used to write about it as well. And now when I try to read one of my papers, I don't know WTF I am talking about! And when I look at books I *loved* by Jameson and Bourdieu I wonder - well, again I'd have to say, WTF?!!!
I.e., I think your points are well-taken, even though the direction my affections have taken has been the opposite of yours!
Gautami - I agree completely.
ReplyDeleteRhapsody - I'm not sure our affections are opposite as I have not included much in this post to indicate my preferences. For example, I'm not a postmod, semotician, or a poststructuralist; although I completely see how my examples fall into those categories. I'm...eclectic. And really, all of those "movements" bring out many WTF exclamations!