Thanks to SF Signal, I came across this interesting post on The Guardian Book Blog. Once again, it's about whether or not one can trust online book reviews.
Here's an excerpt:
"But why should we believe the blogger?" comes the cry. "Who are they and how are they qualified to tell us what to read?" The answer is: you should believe them and trust them in exactly the same way you would a critic in a newspaper or literary journal. There will be some you admire and some you think are stupid. Some bloggers write well and some badly and so do some literary critics.
Alas, everything is relative, and if George Bush can become President of the United States, then on a relative scale, in fairness, we should hardly be complaining about the qualifications of book reviewer bloggers.
ReplyDeleteSuccinct and absolutely correct. There are a lot of bloggers who rave about everything they post; I know not to trust their reviews. The rest, who actually try to write something of value, I respect and continue to read.
ReplyDeleteIs it just me, or is that qoute a very wordy way to state the obvious?
ReplyDeletesahakuen you are absolutely correct. They could have gotten across the same idea with about half the words. I always felt that the point of writing reviews is to try and bring express your opinion on a book.
ReplyDeleteJeez, rudeness in the blogoshpere abounds. I know who's blogs I don't feel the need to visit.
ReplyDeletesqt, your point is also valid about reviewers who praise everything they review. With so many different authors and styles there is bound to be something a reviewer likes more than the other. Looking for people who try and be objective is the way to go.
ReplyDelete