Why You Should Review Books You Don’t Like

I had to fight NOT to comment on a recent online discussion about book reviews and reviewers. Friend and novelist Gina Holmes recently posted on the subject. In Confessions of a Book Reviewer, Gina summarized what she’s learned as a published author and lamented “spiteful reviewers” who post reviews that are “anything but objective and balanced.”

Gina’s not the first author to deplore the mean-spirited, one-star, one-sentence, “hit piece” that passes for a review. It’s an increasingly common sentiment among Christian authors who feel our work is not getting a fair shake in the marketplace. It’s led to the conclusion not just that there are many “unprofessional” reviewers out there, but that some readers are flat-out biased against Christian books.

But as I followed the comment thread on Gina’s post, the more it made me wonder whether the Christian writing community is guilty of its own biases. One bias is expressed like this:

“I don’t review a book if I don’t like it.”

This statement is repeated often by Christian reviewers. My question is: Why? Why don’t Christian reviewers review books they don’t like? Here’s some of reasons typically offered:

• Book reviews are subjective, so if mine’s “bad,” I give the author the benefit of the doubt.
• If you can’t say something good, don’t say anything at all.
• A bad review may hurt an author’s sales, and you don’t want to jeopardize someone’s livelhood.
• Someone else will probably like it, so why ruin it for them.
• You’re not a fan of the genre, so you probably just didn’t “get it.”
• Art criticism is subjective.
• The publishing industry is a close-knit community and you don’t want to make enemies and burn bridges.
• We should encourage and support authors, not tear them down.

There’s some validity, I guess, to each of these points. Nevertheless, the position taken by many Christian reviewers — the one that treats fellow Christian authors with kid gloves — reveals a terminal bias that squelches honesty, hampers artistic growth, deeply over-sensitizes us to necessary criticism, and keeps us cloistered in a plastic, feel-good, pseudo-Christian, echo chamber.

Listen: The reviewer who writes a snide, malicious, one-sentence review is dismissed by most fair-minded readers.

So why worry about them?

In fact, the same “system” that allows reviewers to give us biased, mean-spirited, ungenerous, one-star reviews of our books, also allows reviewers to give us biased, gushing, uncritical, five-star reviews of our books.

Question: Why don’t we gripe about the syrupy five-star reviews as much as we do the vile one-star reviews?

Author Karen Witemeyer commented on Gina’s post,

I don’t read many reviews, but when I do, I get tired of the ones that only talk about how great the book is. That type of reviewer loses credibility with me. As a reader, I want an honest appraisal to know if I should spend my money on a book. If you always gush, how can I determine the difference between and okay book and a fabulous one?

Especially in the realm of Christian fiction, the line between influencer and reviewer can be blurred because we all want to be encouragers. (emphasis mine)

Bingo.

The reason we don’t review books we don’t like is that we’ve blurred the lines “between influencer and reviewer.” Christian reviewers primarily see themselves as Influencers, rather than objective critics.

This, my friends, reveals bias.

Understanding how we got here, I think, is terribly important. My experience as a pastor (for 11 years), a Christian (for almost 31 years), and a published author (2005-?), has led me to this conclusion:

Christian writers and readers often feel discriminated against by the secular world (see: biased, mean-spirited, one-star reviews). We also feel an inherent obligation to validate and further the influence of Christian books and authors. As a result, giving each other attaboys, applause, and five-star ratings, balances out the spite and bias, and (hopefully) bolsters our literary cred.

This is one reason why we don’t review books we don’t like: It doesn’t further our “Christian” agenda.

OK. So why should reviewers review books they don’t like? Here’s seven reasons:

If we don’t review books we don’t like, how in the world can anyone ever trust our reviews? We are no better than the emperor’s tailor gushing about his “invisible” clothes. Why trust his advice if he can’t admit when someone’s naked?

If we don’t review books we don’t like, we are forced to “like” books we really don’t. In other words, our commitment to “being positive” stunts our “critical thinking.” In the spirit of generosity, we sacrifice honesty.

If we don’t review books we don’t like, we do a disservice to discerning readers. Most readers approach reviews on the assumption that the truth will be told. Should I spend my hard earned money on this book? My trust is violated if you can’t trust me enough to make up my own mind.

If we don’t review books we don’t like, we do a disservice to growing authors. I have benefited from critiques of my first novel and believe they made my second novel even better. This wouldn’t have happened if everybody told me I was a literary genius.

If we don’t review books we don’t like, then being silent about a book IS A NEGATIVE REVIEW. If you espouse the “if you can’t say anything good, then don’t say anything” review policy, by not saying anything about a book you expose your real feelings.

A negative review can be done in a positive, constructive way. Perhaps the biggest misconception we have is that being critical of a book equates to being unloving. On the contrary, the Bible commands us to “speak the truth in love” (Eph. 4;15), not to “avoid the truth because it might hurt someone’s feelings.”

Self-criticism validates the Christian arts community. Just as “judgment should begin in the house of God” (I Pet. 4:17), Christian artists should be constantly striving for better, holding each other accountable for a higher standard. By avoiding negative reviews and winking at five-star puff pieces, we remove a necessary mechanism for legitimate ongoing growth.

While I don’t agree with many of the author’s conclusions, The Cult of the Amateur by Andrew Keen should be required reading for social mediates and reviewers. He writes,

The cult of the amateur has made it increasingly difficult to determine the difference between reader and writer, between artist and spin doctor, between art and advertisement, between amateur and expert. The result? The decline of the quality and reliability of the information we receive, thereby distorting, if not outrightly corrupting, our national civic conversation.

I believe Christian reviewers have fallen into this trap, blurred the lines “between artist and spin doctor, between art and advertisement.”As a result, there’s been a “decline of the quality and reliability of the [reviews] we receive.”

By choosing to review only the books we like, we reveal our own biases and make ourselves out to be little more than spin doctors.