STARRY-EYED!
I
write thrillers and mysteries published as ebooks on Amazon. Readers, a
surprising number of whom aren’t relatives, friends or people who owe me money,
post reviews on the Amazon website. The reviews range from one to five stars. In
order of “star-iness” the ranking are:
- I hate it
- I didn’t like it
- It’s OK
- I like it
- I love it
(By
the way, I didn’t make this up. I copied the list straight from the Amazon
page!)
Four-
and five-star reviews, of course, are the most coveted. A five-star review is
terrific, especially if it isn’t written by your mother. I’ve had five stars
from people in other countries who I don’t know. Assuming they weren’t written by
someone occupying a padded cell in, say, the London Institute for the Criminally
Insane, I cherish those reviews.
Four
stars, from an author’s perspective, are often more valuable, since they
indicate the reader not only liked the book, but probably put a lot of thought
into the review. (One reviewer said he wished Amazon allowed half stars,
because the book deserved more than four but not quite five; I’m not sure I
read my own books with that level of interest.)
At
the bottom of the pile are the one- and two-star reviews. I am happy to report
that I have rarely been skewered by such mean-spirited and uninformed comments
by people who really should be in the London Institute for the Criminally
Insane.
Only
kidding. Some folks just don’t like my kind of writing. Or maybe I owe money to them. Truth is, getting a bad review
is not all bad, since it provides a much-needed reality check for authors, such
as moi, who think they are bloomin’ geniuses. Most of us are just regular
people who forget to take out the garbage and regularly miss golf putts the
length of a paramecium. Such reviews also serve to convince potential readers
that my books are being critiqued by total strangers, and not people I am
holding at gunpoint. Nothing validates good reviews more than the occasional scurvy
one.
Then,
there are three-star reviews. They are often weird. There is no other word for
some of them. I’ve had a three-star that was so complimentary I had to check to
make sure I didn’t write it myself. And I’ve had a three-star so scathing I
could imagine the reader hurling his Kindle across the room in disgust. Yet it
got three stars, which according to ranking system above, means that he thought
it was “OK”.
But
some three-star reviews are also very valuable, since readers often identify
what they liked or disliked (plot, characters, length, typos, etc.). I’m not a
writer that wants to cater to every taste, but I’d be dumber than a sponge to
ignore constructive criticism.
I
once received one three-star review that really rocked me. Here it is, verbatim: “I sort of liked it but it was not up to the standards of the Spenser
series. I may be spoiled by Parker.”
Me,
too, pal. I revered Robert B. Parker, who re-invented the private eye novel
with his Spenser novels. Parker set the bar to a level I probably will never
reach. But that doesn’t mean I won’t stop trying. Indeed, I periodically
re-read ALL the Spenser novels for a literary transfusion of sorts.
And I read
just about everything Parker said about writing. Asked
once why he thought his books were so popular, Parker argued that people probably
just liked the way they sounded (or, in effect, read). His dialogue and
descriptions, he indicated, kept his fans involved. They enjoyed being in the
world of Spenser, Hawk, Susan, Quirk, Belson, Vinnie Morris and all the other
colorful and familiar characters, good and evil. I
think Parker was being self-deprecating. Many of his Spensers also had terrific
plots and surprises, which kept readers coming back for more. But I took to
heart his belief that all characters (both heroes and villains) must be
interesting, and not cardboard stereotypes.
And
I take to heart that three-star review suggesting – demanding – that I up my
game.
Comments
Post a Comment