“Thoughtful Ramblings” is a feature where we discuss bookish subjects. These posts are just our own thoughts about certain topics that may get us hot under the collar and we need a good rant or just things we want to share with fellow bloggers and readers.
Reviews: Long or Short?
I have a love/hate relationship with my reviews. On the one hand I love them because they are to the point and get across my feelings for the book quickly without a lot of bumf. I like to add my feelings towards the story in general along with the plot and the characters, but when you read my review you will instantly know whether I like it and if I would recommend it.
On the other hand, I look around at all the long, in-depth reviews some bloggers write (*cough* The Book Smugglers *cough*) and get all intimidated. Some bloggers can dissect a book to its very core, give a detailed description of plot, a comprehensive examination of the characters development, add huge quotations that give their findings more emphasis etc etc…
These bloggers do an amazing job. But although I’m totally jealous in awe of their obvious talent, should I really be intimidated?
There’s a lot to be said for the shorter review, and personally, I prefer them, that’s probably the reason I write them. I don’t need the addition of quotes to understand where the reviewer is coming from, but I do like to read how the book made the reviewer feel and what they thought about the characters and plot. I think that this can be achieved in a shorter review as well as a longer one. I do find myself skimming longer reviews just to get to the conclusion, which is, to be honest, the main reason I read reviews in the first place and that is – did they like the book and would they recommend it?
Reading and writing reviews, long or short, is a personal preference. Book Love Affair held a poll last month and the results were 60/40 in favour of longer reviews. But was this result because TJ writes longer reviews and as the votes mostly came from her readers were the results that surprising?
Fantasy Dreamers Ramblings has an ongoing poll looking at reviews, but her results at present are the other way around with shorter reviews coming out on top. Is this because Fantasy Dreamer writes shorter reviews and therefore her readers voted for shorter because that’s the reason they visit her blog and read her reviews?
After eight months of blogging, the love/hate relationship with my reviews is still ongoing and although I think they have got better, I constantly think they are in need of some serious improvement. I still hate envy those who can analyse a book so completely and get their thoughts down on paper, but am I taking this all too seriously or do all bloggers feel this about their reviews? Do those who write long reviews wish they could be more concise?
So, what’s your take on this? How do you like your reviews – long or short?
FYI: My reviews are 300-600 words.
58 Comments
I like reviews that are kept short. I never finish reading a review when they are so long. I have to admit I get a little bored with it.
Reply
Hmmm, I'm not sure. Although I write long reviews I think as a reader I'd skim through it, so I'm often intimidated by the shorter reviews. I sometimes feel like I might spoil things for people, but I can't help my long reviews because I just get so into it. I wish I could write a 'medium review' haha XD
Reply
I've always tended to write longer reviews personally because I like to dissect a book in my mind and get down all my thoughts about it. I have tried shorter 200-300 word reviews and just found myself not getting across anything important that I wanted to say. On our blog, we've settled on around 600-800 words per review and it seems to work for us. We don't struggle to get this amount and find it allows us to convey what we need to about a book, and hopefully they aren't too boring to read either (let us know if they are!). I think too short and you can leave your reader not knowing much more than they did before they read your review, and too long (i.e. 1000 words +) can be a little tedious to read. I enjoy your reviews length to read, and enjoy writing my length reviews so I really think it is a case of each to their own!
Reply
I prefer reviews that are a little longer and more in-depth. Then again, those are the types of reviews I prefer to write myself. I think sometimes it gets gratuitous when quotes are just big chunks of text and not a line here or there to make a point or when the summary of the book is as long as the analyzing/reviewing.
You're right, though: reviews do not need to be long OR short to get the point across. Both do this well just in different ways.
Reply
This is a great question that I've been debating too with my reviews. I'm starting to side with the shorter review (maybe 3 paragraph limit if the reviewer includes a blurb) because I'm finding with the longer reviews sometimes they give too much of the plot away. I had that happen with a book I was reading recently, I'm in the middle of the book, not sure what's going to happen, and I read someone's review of the book and it gave away a plot point that I wasn't sure was going to happen. I'm sure the reviewer didn't mean to giveaway something and decrease my enjoyment of the book but that is the risk you run when writing longer reviews. Thanks for doing this question! I'm looking forward to seeing what everyone says.
Reply
Personally I prefer shorter reviews. I tend to end up skipping through the longer ones and that always makes me think that if I can't be bothered to read the review, can I be bothered to read the book, when in actual fact I just don't want to know all the details before I read the book.
I don't mind reading longer reviews of books I've already read though as then it's more of a discussion of the book. It's great to read what a person liked/disliked, which characters they loved etc but to me it can be a bit hard to follow before reading the book.
Reply
Some really clever girl told me that it should be short.. not more the 500 words.. because we all jump to the end to get pro and cons..:)
Reply
For me, I just write what I feel. I do start with a short summary. Then I discuss plot, characters, quality of writing, narrative voice etc. But it all depends on how I feel about the book. If I loved it, the chances are the review will naturally be longer as I want to share my passion. If the book was okay, I enjoyed it but was not captivated by it, then the review is shorter. If I hated it, the review is again long as I like to illustrate where this dislike came from. I don't mind short reviews as long as I'm convinced by the bloggers thoughts. I don't do quotes and I kind of kind it annoying when people do. I can read the book for myself what I'm looking for in a review is an opinion.
Reply
I'm going to be really awkward and say I like both! I love your reviews because they are bite-sized and get me to the point nice and quickly. I know exactly how you feel about a book at the end of a review. However I also love savouring the longer reviews by people like The Book Smugglers but I will save their reviews to a point where I can give them the time and attention they deserve.
I think writing reviews is the best way for bloggers to achieve their own voice and space in the blogosphere – so you should totally stick with how you like to do it. The moment you try to force another style on your reviews is the time you sound fake and lose your voice in my opinion.
Reply
i tend to write reviews in the 500-700 word range, so this is on the medium to long side. i also try to use a consistent format to make it a little more predictable for my regular readers.
brief synopsis with specific points of interest
comment on writing style and character development
reactions to the book and things i liked/loved/disliked
who i recommend the book too, if i recommend it
as a reader, i prefer medium length reviews. there is definitely a point where it is TOO long and i'll just skim through for points of interest, but short reviews don't usually give me enough information and i'll end up looking the book up on amazon or goodreads instead.
Reply
I write 400-500 word reviews, but sometimes I feel like I am pushing with that. At times I like a book so much I can get my point across quicker with a short review. It generally depends, but I think your 300-600 words is a good range for a reader.
Reply
Jessy – I tend to agree that I get a little bored, that's why I skim to the end..
Miriam – haha, medium review would be good :_
Chloe – I think even with shorter reviews a person get can get down all their thoughts. I know I do. I think it is just as much an art to write short reviews and keep things concise as it is to write longer ones. As you say though each to their own
Erika – I agree, I think it's in the execution whether short or long review works
Heather – I can completely understand your frustration regarding spoilers, I just hope I don't do that in my reviews
Trillian – I agree, reading longer reviews of books I've already read is actually really interesting – great point!
VisionScifi – hehe, which girl was that then?
Reply
Honestly? I prefer shorter reviews, and ones that don't give me a full run down of the novel. One's where, once you've finished, you feel like you've already read the book without even picking it up.
I try to keep to 500-600 words and mostly focus on what I thought and the characters development while giving a brief outline of what the book is about without giving too much away. Which sometimes is something I struggle with, how much of the plot do you discuss?
The long and short of it is I will generally stay away from long reviews for fear of being spoilt by too much detail and stick to the shorter ones.
Reply
Great topic for discussion. I find myself in a similar love/hate relationship with my reviews. Sometimes, I can't think of the right words to say about a book so my review ends up being super short. Other times, I have so much to say about a book that my review inevitably comes out much longer than expected. Regardless of the size, I like reviews that are split into pieces – this way I can choose to read the part that I really want to read (what the review thought of the book) or I can choose to read the entire flushed out discussion of the book (this tends to be something I enjoy more when I have already read the book and have something to contribute to the discussion). Still, I think that the size of a review depends on the book. Some books are meant to have pages upon pages written about them and others, not so much.
Reply
Great question!
5-600 words – good length, imho. I rarely have time to read extremely long reviews, though I do skim them. It's nice to read a synopsis of a book followed by a reader's opinion about what was working in it.
Reply
I don't think there can be an 'optimum length review' that will please everyone – as the comments here show, everyone likes different things. I personally write about 500 (ish) words, sometimes more sometimes less, depending on the book and how it made me feel etc. I write what I would be interested in reading. BTW just wanted to say thanks for 'Random' – I can't wait to read / review it!
Reply
Theoretically, I like both. I like a review that gives me the essence of the book, and entertains me at the same time. If it does that, I don't care how many words it is.
However, I think the reviews that do that for me are usually between 500 and 800 words long. Much longer than that, and unless I really like the reviewer's style I'll probably lose interest just because my attention span really isn't that long.
Reply
Becky – I agree, my reviews range from 300-600 words (which is still classed as short/medium) and it all depends on the book and how I feel about it.
Magemanda – I agree with you totally
thelittlereader – my reviews are 300-600 depending on the book, so I'm short-medium I suppose
Kate – thanks, I hope that I get across everything I want to and what the reader wants in my reviews.
Beth – I don't like too much book summary, I prefer to read the thoughts of the reviewer. I can get the summary from the book itself. I don't tend to summarise myself, I let the book cover or Gooreads/Amazon do that for me and just concentrate on my thoughts.
JusticeJen – Yes! That's how I feel! I think that's why my reviews range from 300-600 as it really depends on the book I've read to how much, or how little, I write about it.
Lana – that's how I structure my review: book summary followed by my thoughts
dkm1981 – your welcome *for Random* I hope you enjoy it
And I think you're right, everyone is different.
Lauren – I do find reviews more than 800 words just too long for my taste and like you I tend to lose interest.
Reply
I like them short. I can't stand reading a book before the book LOL..
I just like reading a review on how they liked it, a sneak peak on whats in the book and what they didn't like about it.(if there's anything they don't like)
This way between what they liked and didn't liked you can kind of tell if it would be for you or not.
Reply
Oh interesting, I was just thinking about this myself. I started reviewing on a site that encourages long reviews (reaaaally long sometimes) and so had that habit myself. But since I started blogging a few weeks ago I'm swaying towards shorter reviews being more helpful to potential readers.
I think as well it depends on the book and the reviewers style of writing. Short and snappy can really leave me intrigued and wanting to read the book myself. And some books I just have more to say about than others. Somewhere between 300-700 words I think are ideal. More importantly though I think the reviewers voice itself is what makes a great review.
Reply
I'm a short review writer myself. My "reviews" tend to run 200 words or less, not counting the "back of the book" blurb. I've just always done it that way. I guess it's because I'm less concerned with reviewing the book than I am with recording how I felt about it. If a book really grabs me, I'll write more.
Reply
I prefer short reviews myself, especially if they do not give too many spoilers. I like to have quotes, well, just because I like em myself. When I do reviews, I almost always have some of my fav quotes in them. I've just started doing them on my blog and it really interests me what others like to read in a review.
http://raymentsreadingsrantsan.....gspot.com/
Reply
I used to write these long winded reviews, but now I am really trying to get them to around 800 words or at least under 1000.
Reply
Ha ha ha, as a new avid follower of 'The Book Smugglers' I understand where you are coming from. As much as I enjoy their reviews, I tend to follow with yours in terms of length.
While I understand the insecurity with it, as they do work amazingly well with the depth and scope of the novel they review, it's a little much. Story summaries, quotes, and blurbs are just fluff that make it long, but for me, they could be taken out entirely. If I'm reading it I skim straight to the two or three paragraphs of the analysis and opinion, as I have no patience, am lazy, and generally don't have time to read a lot of reviews that long.
The best kinds of reviews for me are short ones, but they're best when they encompass the depth the long ones do. It's one thing to write a long in depth review as opposed to a short one that conveys the same points in a smaller fashion. That way, as a reader I can get what I need to know without digging and digging beneath all the fluff. As a writer, it allows me to convey my point without too much effort, and it allows me to hold sway with more readers.
Reply
I read both long and short reviews but it is much easier to read shorter reviews. Sometimes I'm just not in the mood to sit down and read a long review.
Reply
I enjoy the mix of quick opinions and lengthy analysis kicking around the blogosphere. If we were all the same why would we bother to read each other?
Reply
As someone who loves books and ADORES book blogs (my Google Reader overfloweth! *g*), I have to say I like the long reviews.
I don't like them if they are just long and rambling, but I DO enjoy them if they are clearly laid out with sub-headings, etc. *cough*The Book Smugglers*cough*
That's not to say I don't like shorter reviews – it's cool sometimes to have something quicker to read, and more books could be covered (in theory). But overall, it's the indepth reviews that draw me in. I think I lack those skills myself, so that could explain why I'm so drawn to them.
Reply
I like short reviews for two reasons:
1. I have a very broad definition of what a spoiler is. What you may think is a tiny bit of non-spoiler info, could totally piss me off if I heard it beforehand.
2. I don't wanna feel like I've read a novel before I read the book.
I mostly look for what everyone rates the book as, and a few reasons why they gave it that score.
On my blog, I write a short paragraph about the novel's plot, pace, characters, and cover. I think it's a nice overview without giving too much away.
Reply
Much prefer reviews on the shorter side like yours Carolyn. Partly because super long reviews just seem self-indulgent. I agree it kind of depends on what your end is… if you're purely doing it for your own pleasure and are not bothered who is visiting your site and reading your stuff (as many book bloggers do) then I can understand why people write reams and reams. If however you feel you're providing a service and you want to develop a rapport with your readers, then surely you're aim is to just offer a taster of the book and almost act as a shop window, simply enticing people in to read (or not read!) the book in question and generate comment and debate? I also think writing specifically for the web has to come into play here too – bloggers are writing for 'scanners' as opposed to readers and that too should be a consideration. If it ain't broke don't fix it – we love your reviews at BookRabbit!
Reply
I love short ones so I write short ones. Great question
Reply
I try to write shorter reviews, but, then I always feel like it needs something added, and then I think of something else I want to say and so on…. I don't think people who post the blurb and say a short,and say why they like it in a short sentences. To me that isn't a review. A review is going through the story and commenting your opinion of different aspects of it. So by the time you are finished you are looking at it and swearing under your breath because no matter how short you want it, there seems to be something else to add. And I tend to ramble on…:P
Reply
Though I'm usually a fan of longer, more in-depth review, I definitely agree that there's something to be said for shorter ones as well. I don't think anyone should feel intimidated for writing the way they write (easier said that done, I know). I look at my google reader and I see such diversity of styles – and I love it that way. There's really no "how to"; if I love the blogger's voice, I'll love the blog regardless of how long or how short their reviews are.
Reply
To be honest, I only rarely read a full long review and I think it really depends on what you're going for.
Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but if you don't want to give too many spoilers you're pretty limited in what you can write. If you're fine with giving spoilers and really want to either dissect the book or you are reviewing just for people who have read the book – longer is the way to go.
I appreciate a long review because I can still pick and choose what to read, but I also like short reviews b/c most of the time I just want to know how much the reviewer liked it (even just a rating works sometimes).
Reply
I prefer them short. If I wanted to read all that in a review, I'll just read the book myself. I write reviews for a local gazette and I keep it short. K.I.S.S. "Keep it short stupid"
I tend to comment about books the same way I would chat about what I was reading to a co-worker. I'm reading "TITLE OF BOOK" and it's so fantastic because it's about " brief sentence here" and if you like books about " " you'll love it.
True readers don't read books based on reviews anyway…do they? I don't. I read them based on the cover, the author, my past experiences.
http://www.shishnit.org
Reply
Ok, I am going to give an answer that will drive you crazy. I don't like a review to be so short I don't glean anything from it, but if it's too lengthy I quit part way through.
And, I don't tend to read the quotes in a review.
Reply
Short. I have noticed people's (and my own) attention span can get short so I keep my short and sweet and to the point. If a review is too long I skim over it.
Reply
I try to be short, but not brief. I think if it is too long, people tend not to read, but skim. Too short of an answer?
Reply
I prefer shorter reviews. I read reviews to determine if I want to read the book so I look for specific content: what you liked, what annoyed you and if you desperately want those hours back. All without any but the smallest spoilers.
Don't want much, right?
Reply
This is my sticking point right now. I don't usually want to read really long ones. I also don't want to give anything away.
Reply
I say short, because I find I get lost in the long winded comments, but it does depend on the books. The chunksters can definitely warrant a long review.
Reply
My reviews I think run a little more towards the long side, mainly because I tend to meander when I write. My background is editing so I think I'm more capable than reviewers without that background to more thoroughly dissect a book. It doesn't mean I always do, though.
If I find enough stylistic issues with a book that it actually sticks in my memory, I'll talk about them. I rarely use quotes but if I do, it's because it stuck in my head.
Book blogging is about giving an opinion, not a book report. Long or short, I read reviews to get other people's opinions. If it gets way too technical and drawn out, I'll stop reading. Sometimes short is too lacking, though. I'd like a review long enough to give me an idea of WHY the reviewer felt the way they did but short enough so that I'm not narcoleptic by the end of it.
Reply
I like them short. I like a quick review to see whether the book is recommended or not as I find myself just skipping to end of a longer review anyway.
Reply
Thank you for the link!
I think it's good to have a variety of reviewer styles out there, because in the end many people like short reviews and many like long. I, myself, love the long ones.
Reply
I believe that you can dissect a book and analyze it without going over-the-top. I believe that readers like to read reviews that tell them straight-up, why they recommend it or why they don't. If you over analyze AND ramble on and on, you will lose your readers, imo.
Personally also, for me, it's not really about the "length." You can make it as short or as long as you want, as long as every sentence that you included there contributes something important. If it doesn't, edit edit edit
And @Book Chick City, I really love your reviews as they are. I notice sometimes, you have short&long reviews, but you never ramble on about unnecessary things. Everything you say, counts. I think that's what matters.
Random Ramblings
Reply
Well, you already know my opinion…I like a short review if I haven't read the book. I've read too many long reviews that gave away minor plots, so I'm gun shy on them until I've read the book. Ultimately, I think it's how satisfied you feel with your reviews and to not push yourself into writing reviews that's not your within your writing comfort range.
I know why my reviews are short, it's because in general I tend to be concise and to point in most anything I do. Though I'm an avid reader, I'm not a word smith. Plus this also might have something to do with me being a programmer? We tend to get to point b from point a by the shortest means possible. LOL!
Reply
I'm stuck between the two. Sometimes I come across really long reviews but I'm willing to read through them if they're well-written and explain why the blogger liked or didn't like whatever book they read. I always read to the end unless it's just someone gushing/bashing a book and not giving me a reason for WHY they felt this way. I mean, it's cool if you totally love a book but if all I get is: "This book was amazing, you HAVE to read it!"…. that tells me nothing. I need to know WHY it's awesome :/ Then there's the short reviews that go along the same route. I hate when I see those types! I don't care about length most of the time; some bloggers like to write short reviews but manage to convince me to pick up/avoid a book. Other bloggers write long reviews and cover as much as possible. I appreciate both styles; it just depends on how well the reviews are.
Reply
I try to keep my reviews relatively short and that is also how I like to read them. Short and to the point. I do not think it's necessary to reiterate the plot. Personally, I think the reviewer risks giving too much of the plot away and ruining the story for others. In my opinion, a good review tells how you feel about the book, what you liked and/or didn't like, and whether you recommend it or not. And please, never forget the SPOILER ALERT! By the way, I think your reviews are great just the way you write them so give yourself a pat on the back!
Reply
SORRY FOR THE LONG STREAM OF REPLIES, BUT WHILE YOU WERE COMMENTING I WAS SLEEPING LOL
Laurie – I like shorter ones too, I think, although they still have to be well written to get everything across but staying concise.
Rhiana – I agree, it does depend on the book. As I've mentioned above I write review between 300-600 words and how much, or how little, I have to say depends totally on what I've just read. Sometimes I have lots to say, sometimes not so much
Jaime – 200 is very short, but as long as you get to say what you want about the book then that's cool
mountie9 – I've read a lot of comments here about long reviews containing spoilers, I think some of the more accomplished writers can get away from spoilers in long reviews, but I agree that most of the time this isn't the case.
Katiebabs – so, it does show me then that bloggers who write longer reviews but who want to write shorter ones do have difficulty being more concise, just as people who write shorter reviews find it difficult to find more words LOL
John – The Book Smugglers are totally amazing, and I think, by what I've read, they do steer clear of spoilers. I do find their reviews to long for me but they are very well written. I hope that although I writer shorter reviews (300-600) I still have depth and scope
Ladybug – I agree. I think I like reading long reviews more for a book I've already read. I do prefer the shorter ones for books I haven't.
Hagelrat – very true
Karen – I agree, I have read long reviews that just waffle on and on… The Book Smugglers are not one of these. I can't believe how well written the reviews are esp when Ana comes from Brazil – her English is AMAZING!!! I do think shorter reviews can have depth, but it's definitely an art. A bit like editing a book really, keeping the important aspects but removing the unnecessary.
Sara – I've had a lot of comments regarding spoilers… I'm worried now *runs off to check reviews*
Sarah – aw thanks, I'm glad you like my reviews
And I like your analogy with the shop window. I think that's why I like shorter reviews, they give me enough of a taster to rush off and hit the 1-click button on Amazon 
Juju – thanks!
Lori – I do that all the time, but mostly when I go back and read a past review. I always think 'damn, I wish I'd said that!"
Nymeth – I think you are totally right about the "bloggers voice" I think if it's distinctive and I like they way they "talk" then I will go back even if they write longer reviews
Seak – Spoilers have been mentioned quite a lot in this discussion and it's obviously a big issue with a lot of readers. However, I think it comes down to the reviewer and how well they write. Just as with shorter reviews takes quite a bit of editing to get across what you want to say but without all the unnecessary words
Reply
Kristy – I do actually read/buy books based on reviews. If enough bloggers/reviwers liked a book then It will definitely push me to buy it. However, negative reviews wont make me not buy a book, I always like to find out for myself so will always buy a book if I want it regardless of a bad review.
hcmurdoch – I think you're right. A short reviews has to be just as well written as a long review. Just because it's long doesn't mean it's just waffles and just because it's short doesn't mean that it's insignificant.
Rosey – LOL – I must admit that I do tend to skim to the end of a very long review, I'm just not patient enough
Melissa – no, great answer LOL
Annette – Hehe, I think I would like that, but is the perfect review possible?! LOL
Catie – Spoilers have been a big issue in this discussion regarding the longer reviews.
Bella – I agree, it does depend on the book being reviewed
Donna – All good points
Lill – Agreed!
TJ – You're welcome! And I know your a longy
Jillian – aw thanks, I'm glad you like my reviews, means a lot
I agree with everything you said. I think whether a review is long or short, if well written then both can be good.
Donna – I think if you can say everything you want to say about a book in a shorter concise review then that's just as good as keeping spoilers out of a long review. Both have weakness, but both have their strengths too.
Pirate – I think that's the key – well written. I think It's true for both long and short reviews.
Michelle – thanks, I'm pleased you like the way I write my reviews, it's nice to hear that
THANKS EVERYONE FOR JOINING IN THE DISCUSSION, IT WAS REALLY INTERESTING HEARING ALL YOUR VIEWS! THANKS SO MUCH FOR STOPPING BY!
Reply
Totally late to comment, but I just saw your post this morning!
Yes, our reviews are long (usually around 1000 words per piece) – but we simply can't do it any other way. I find it that I have so much to say (even without spoilers – we avoid them unless we must mention something in order to be more in depth) about all aspects of the book: plot, characters, writing, my enjoyment, etc that I can't simply do it in a few words. : D
and thank you for what you said about my English, you are far too kind!
Reply
Ana – and you do a very good job too! I do think that all the aspects you mention: plot, characters, writing, enjoyment can be expressed in a shorter review as well, but I think it's the quality of writing that's important, which makes a long or short review successful.
And you're welcome – to write the way you do as a foreign language, is amazing
Reply
Three to six hundred sounds good to me! I tend to write about the same for my own reviews. My heart sinks a bit when I see a review that goes on and on for pages… I think I might as well be reading the book…
paul
http://www.paulmagrs.com
Reply
Both! Depending on the reason I'm reading the review. If I've had my eye on something for a while, and I think I'm really going to like it. Then I may read a few short reviews before deciding to take the plunge.
If it's something that I wouldn't normally consider that has been getting a lot of positive attention. I would prefer a longer one. So I can learn more about about the book.
Overall I think the quality is more important than the length. My only caveat would be that in an age of so many throwaway sound bites, I increasingly find I want something of substance.
Reply
Interesting to see everyone's got a different opinion! I'm in the short review camp. I come from a newspaper background where you have to make every word count. Even though the internet allows you to post whatever length you want, I think reviewers should remember a) readers are usually short on time and want information quickly; and b) editing your writing down to make it more concise generally will improve it. As an editor I'd loved to get my hands on some of those long-winded reviews and show how they can be cut for the better. As a reader I want to know what the book is about (and I prefer the reviewer to tell it in their words, not just repeating the publisher's blurb), a brief comment about their opinion (and I don't really care whether a character reminds you of your aunt Gertrude or that you are morally opposed to what a character is doing – I want to know about the book and author – not about you!) And then give it a star rating. I write newspaper reviews at 100 words, and my site http://www.chicklitclub.com does its reviews as outlined above – I actually call them ratings rather than reviews. (OK, so I write short reviews but long comment posts!)
Reply
Personally, I prefer reading longer reviews, they convince me more as to whether I should get a book or not. I hate the misconception out there that all long reviews are long winded or rambling. How about we say long and informative or long and meaty? Also, when I look at bloggers who write longer reviews their comments tend to be more discussion-like, more of a conversation. When I look at Nymeth's blog, the Boom Smugglers or Aarti at Booklust, they tend to get around 50 or so comments per review if not more from what I see at a quick glance. I don't see that happening with short reviews. Now with a short review what kind of comment will you get, "Great review" which is nice, but sometimes it's awesome to get those meatier comments where someone actually discusses with you something pertaining to your review.
I'm not sure if I'm making any sense, just I notice from the blogs I follow, which is a lot, the longer reviews tend to garner more comment attention.
Reply
Hey, just discovered this post too, thanks to Ana.
It's an interesting article, and I can understand the dilemma. I don't think one type of review is "better" than the other – both long and short reviews have their readers. Generally, as you mention in your post, I think the people that like short reviews gravitate towards those sites, and those that prefer long ones go towards the long review websites. Seeing as sites like Book Chick City have readers, and sites like *cough* The Book Smugglers *cough*
have readers, it makes sense.
In my opinion, it's something each reviewer (and reader!) has to discover for themselves. Some of my favorite reviewers write shorter reviews (Angie of Angieville, for example). But for me, personally, and Ana too, longer reviews are what make us tick!
Reply
Paul – I think it does depend on the reviewer and how they write the review, but generally I prefer shorter ones. But then variety is key to keep each blog unique
Jason – After reading all the comments I have realised something that hadn't occurred to me before. I actually like reading shorter reviews for a book I haven't read but I'm interested in longer reviews for books that I have. Isn't that strange. Have no idea why
Chicklit Club – It has been an interesting discussion, lots of different opinions! I do find editing my writing does make things neater and tighter. As I've said before I think there's an art to writer a good short review as there is for writing a detailed longer one. Both have merits if written well.
April – I don't think there is a misconception that long reviews are long winded or rambling, I just think that a lot of readers have come across those kind of review. But then you could say that people have misconceptions about short reviews having no substance etc. I think if the review is written well then it wont matter whether it's long or short as it will get the point across. I'm not sure I agree that only long review provoke discussion. It is rare that a book review, even for the Smugglers, to get 50+ comments on every review. They certainly have on high profile books if they are being controversial, but not on a regular basis.
Thea – I can definitely see longer reviews are your forte and they are executed brilliantly. I think that you're right that each review and reader has to discover what is right for them. Thanks for stopping by
Reply
I tend to dislike long reviews because they provide too much information and influence my reaction to the book, if I choose to read it. I prefer a short review that tells me the genre, what the book is about (in general), the reviewer's reaction, and how this novel compares to others in the genre.
Reply