Goodreads: A Review

Many of us use Goodreads. It's a great app, if you don't already know, that lets people know you're a boss at reading, keeps people up to date with your most recent literary conquests, and acts as a rather ambitious reading list. I have my suspicions that it came into being after Facebook created that bookshelf add-on (that I honestly liked better) and took over completely when that died. In addition to all those things, Goodreads tends to act as a platform for people to air their opinions about a given book. This aspect of it is fine, but it's the aspect I have the most trouble with. Let me explain.

I tend to avoid the "reviews" section on Goodreads, mostly because what I generally find there aren't reviews, but synopses. I'm not afraid of finding opinions I don't like. On the contrary, just tell me why you don't think Terry Pratchett, Neil Gaiman, or J.R.R. Tolkien is a good author, I dare you. If I had the nerve, I'd tell you all the reasons you're wrong. Since I don't, I'll settle for ranting to my cat. You're free not to like their work or style; that's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine. But in all seriousness, the review section of Goodreads is for reviews. If I wanted a summary of the book, I'd look elsewhere, where people are paid to write me a book report. Chances are, I've already looked up the book and seen an adequate synopsis. Goodreads also typically has a section for this on the main book page.

Now, I know we live in a world where everyone's opinion is given unasked, and everyone's an expert. The problem with that is that it's also wrong. Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying anyone asked for my opinion or that I'm an expert either, but the mere fact that I've written this is proof that some part of my brain believes both of those things. However, this is a review, an opinion. You're more than welcome to disagree. Goodreads, Facebook, and all the other social media platforms have sold us this idea that everyone wants to know what we think. Really, that's just what we want.

Let me get to my main point. When I want to read a book review, I'm looking for an opinion about the contents in the book. I have seen reviews like this, and they're usually unsatisfactory. They liked it, they didn't, it wasn't as good as the last one, it was better, etc. These are all good starting places, but I want you to tell me more. Perhaps I was spoiled by the critical thinking and literature classes I took in high school and college; perhaps I'm asking too much. But when I look for a good book review, I want - no, need - more than that. Why didn't you like it? How was it better? These should be easy questions to answer! If I'm about to invest my time in a new book, and you honestly don't think it's worth my time, tell me why. I'll take your opinion into consideration (or won't) at my own discretion.

This may not be the experience of everyone who's ever used Goodreads. Some people might actually do this well, but in my experience, they have been few and far between. Usually the reviews I'm looking for, reviews by people whose opinion about books I trust, are absent (not naming names). I don't review books either, usually because I can't think of what to say the moment I record that I've finished a book and then I tell myself later that no one cares anyway. While this may or may not be true, I don't tend to review books. The reviews I've seen don't make me feel inclined to any time soon.

If you're one of these inadequate (or wrong!) reviewers, don't take the criticism personally. Use this as an opportunity to reflect on how to be a better reviewer. Use critical thinking and apply yourself to something worth being proud of. I'll work on it too, and maybe we can all get better at being opinionated together.