Rating books is hard, but it isn’t rocket science. The problem is everyone uses a different system and changes it sometimes according to the site they’re on. There just doesn’t seem to be much continuity. Wouldn’t it be nice if three stars on Goodreads meant the same as three stars on Shelfari which meant the same as three stars on Amazon? All three sites are now owned by Amazon.com. We can then worry about bringing everyone else into the fold if we can get the Amazon family on board. Here’s how I rate:
Five Stars – Incredible, must read, nothing wrong here
Four Stars – I really liked it but it may have had a problem or or two. So what?
Three Stars – It was just OK. Nothing special. What was the title again?
Two Stars – I didn’t like it. It wasn’t the worst book out there, but no thanks…
One Star – I hated it. Probably didn’t finish it. OW! It burrrns!
And here’s where we run into the need for 1/2 stars. When I review on Amazon and round up or down, I usually say so. It’s normally at the 3 star and under range that this makes a difference – the difference being, did I finish the book or not? Was it really that bad? Why? Was this a research issue or did the writing bore me? Enjoying an author’s work is personal. Giving a fair review is also personal, but it helps if we can all start at the same point and then move on to say exactly why we did or did not like the book in question.
So, what do you think? What’s your system? How do you rate?