What Should a Review Be?

 

My introduction to the publishing industry came through reviewing books for the New Mystery Reader web site. I’d won an advanced reader’s copy of Elmore Leonard’s The Hot Kid in a contest run by HarperCollins, on the condition I write a review for them. I forwarded the result to Stephanie Padilla, the editor of NMR. She liked it enough to bring me on board. Thank you, Stephanie. Everything that happened since is your fault. 😊

I’d never done reviews before, so I did some research into what should be in them. The best advice I found was that a review should tell a prospective reader if the book passes the $25 test. (Of course it’s more now.) The reviewer’s primary job is to help readers decide if the book is worth spending their money, and time, on. (I wish I remembered who said that, but it was a long time ago and I’m old. In fact, today I’m officially older than I was yesterday. I better go lie down.)

Okay, I’m back. Keeping the “Twenty-five Dollar Rule” in mind, what should be in a review? As you might expect, I have ideas.

First, a brief synopsis of the story. Very brief. Do not divulge any plot twists or too much about the characters; “no spoilers” doesn’t apply only to the end of a book. There are many things that happen along the way readers should be able to enjoy without knowing they’re coming.

That’s why I generally don’t read the back covers of books. Many years ago my eyes accidentally came to rest on the back cover of Scott Phillips’s excellent novel Cottonwood, where I learned what was going to happen in the next chapter. It was something I never would have expected; now it was ruined. Don’t tell any more about the story than you have to for readers to know what kind of book it is. It’s a review, not a book report.

Brief excerpts are fine, so long as they don’t spoil anything. It can come in handy to give readers an example of something you particularly liked, or disliked. It allows them to make up their own minds should their tastes and yours not coincide.

This is especially true if you’re inclined to talk about the quality of the writing. I focus on this when I still do the occasional review, as I read less for the story than for how well it’s told. I enjoy a decent story that’s well-written far more than a fantastic story told to ham-handedly. (Of course, there are limits to how bad the story can be.)

You can also do prospective readers a favor by breaking down the craft for them a little. How dialog-heavy is the book? How good is the dialog? How much description is there? How good is it? Are the characters well drawn? What’s the pace? How much disbelief needs to be suspended, and how often? How much internal dialog is there? Is it used effectively? How violent is the book? How funny? Is it truly funny, or is the author merely trying to be funny? How tight is the writing?

I could go on, but you get the point. A proper review should not be a few paragraphs of story summary followed by one about whether you liked the book. Readers deserve more. (And less, when potential spoilers are involved.) We’ve all seen movie trailers that ruined the movie because they gave too much away. Don’t do that with your review.