Last week I purchased a book from one of my favorite authors. I absolutely love her writing and couldn’t wait for the release of this new book, the first of a new series. Sadly, that is where my excitement ends.
If you all know me I like, and try to write women’s fiction, and contemporary romance. I read many different genres, but I try to read more romance novels because I study them somewhat while I read them. I, by far, am not a professional. I want you to remember that as I ramble on here. You see, I sometimes feel like I shouldn't be able to have a voice, like in a review. I mean, here I am, an amateur novelist. Do I know every rule of style or grammar? Hell to the no. Therefore should I be allowed to write a not so good review of this book?
That brings up another question. We’ve all heard the saying, “If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say it at all.” Should I write a review or two of this book if it isn’t going to be the nicest review? I mean I am not going to say it was a horrible book and I would never buy another from this author. I would never do that. Ever. But is it nice to give a book two stars out of five? Is it nice to write that I was not happy that the hero and heroine didn’t even meet until page 112, or that I think more time was spent on other people that should’ve been spent on the main characters?
I do understand that this is a new series, and I can see that more time may be spent on introducing a new town and its residents. But I don’t understand how a romance novel can almost spend as much time on secondary characters as the main ones. I feel jipped of the whole “getting to know you and character intimacies” aspect of the book.
While I am writing all this I know people put up bad reviews of books. I have read some. I know potential buyers of books sometimes look at reviews, do the authors? That brings me to another ponder. I feel strange leaving a bad review to a well-known, accomplished writer when I am just a fledgling author myself. I know we all have to have thick skin, but do I have a right to be critical when I haven’t been published yet? I think I would feel differently if I were just a straight reader and not a writer also. Make sense?
Trust me; I have left not so great reviews of a few recent books I have read. They were self published books where apparently the writer didn’t think editing was appropriate. I can’t stand that. If one is to not to take the time for something as important as editing it should be depicted in the synopsis. I believe I shouldn't have to pay money for something half finished. Unfortunately that is one of those things not easily picked up by reading a small sample. That’s just my honest opinion.
Speaking of editing… If anyone knows an editor/writing coach I am looking! I have found that they are not easy to come by! If you know someone give me a holla! J
Do you review books you read? Has one of your favorite authors ever let you down? Am I being too critical? Too crazy?
Other places you can find me if you wish: