When I started reviewing books on this blog, I spent a bit of time determining what each rating meant for me. To refresh your memory, here is what I came up with:
One Star—Ick
Two Stars—Meh
Three Stars—Good
Four Stars—Great
Five Stars—ajklsdflk (when words fail to describe how wonderful a book is)
Along the way, I’ve given out a few half stars, but I don’t like including them in the scale, because I don’t like resorting to splitting the difference when I’m conflicted between ratings. Usually, when I’m that torn, it’s because I haven’t managed to dig out a certain defining thought from the back of my brain, and I end up regretting using a half star. (But I don’t judge you if you use half stars. My head is weird, that’s all.)
While I’ve covered my rating system in the past, I haven’t talked much about how I rate books, and since this topic has been on my mind a lot, we’re going to discuss it today.
The Quality of the Writing. This one is the most clear-cut for me, which is why I’ve decided to tackle it first. Now, of course, writing is subjective. A passage I consider particularly well-executed might seem clunky to another reader. That’s okay. But as I have my own private tastes and my own private set of guidelines for what makes for good writing, this will reflect on the ratings I give. In other words, I might give a story fewer stars if it has a great premise and a lot of heart but distractingly bad prose.
The issue with using this as a guideline is that it is not infallible. I have read several books that were well-written, according to my standards, that I ended up giving low star ratings because they didn’t click with me, for whatever reason. It can be tempting to look at a book objectively and think, “Well the writing is good enough to deserve five stars, even though the story wasn’t my cup of coffee.” And I do take that into account, because I want my ratings to reflect on the quality of the writing. Yet I also know that there are people (even if only a handful) who pay attention to how I rate books because they share similar tastes, and I don’t want to mislead anybody into reading something I didn’t actually enjoy, no matter how good the writing.
Truth/Honesty. One thing you may or may not have picked up on, if you’ve followed my blog for any amount of time, is the fact that I am almost obsessive about whether or not stories tell the truth about the world, or humanity, or whatever. (For example, on Monday I discussed my issues with the pretty lie at the end of Shakespeare’s THE WINTER’S TALE.) If a story is poorly-written and would warrant three stars on those grounds, but happens to tell the truth about something, no matter how unpleasant that truth might be, I am likely to at least consider giving it another star.
Message. If I agree with a book’s message, I am obviously going to factor that in when I decide the rating. Even if I disagree, but I find the book is good food for thought, I may give more stars. And on the reverse side, if I disagree with what the book is saying (as with Socrates' stance on fiction in THE REPUBLIC), I am more likely to dock stars.
Premise. If a book has a great premise that really draws me in and gets my imagination going, even if it is poorly-written, I am likely to be a little more favorable. For instance, BATTLE ROYALE isn’t particularly well-written (in my opinion), but the premise is to die for. That being said, I don’t usually end up giving books like BATTLE ROYALE five stars (see my initial point).
Emotions. Not everyone responds to emotional stimuli in the same way, obviously, and a person’s emotional response to a story is not necessarily a reflection on the quality of the book itself. When I first read MOCKINGJAY right after it came out, I did not like it. I just wasn’t at a good place in my head, which meant I wasn't able to appreciate the series conclusion for what it was. If I had rated it then, I would have given it one or two stars and felt justified in doing so. However, when I did get around to rereading it last year, I found that I lovedllvedloved it, and I ended up giving it five stars. The tricky part about this is that it doesn’t feel fair to rate a book according to my feelings, since feelings aren’t the most reliable gauge of quality. But feelings are also important, as I have to remind myself. And it’s my rating, so I’m allowed to do what I like. If a book makes me feel something, that deserves recognition. Go book.
Nostalgia. And finally, we come to the most unreliable part, which also happens to be my favorite. Outside factors are difficult to control. You could pick up a book you would love under ordinary circumstances, only to spend the entire time you read it trying to ignore your annoying sibling or your parents arguing or something equally unpleasant. This could taint your experience with the book, and thus your final opinion. Conversely, events could conspire to create an environment in which you fall head-over-heels for a book you would ordinarily have disliked.
I have a lot of favorite books, as you probably know, and all of them have fond memories of some sort attached to them. Sometimes, when I reread them, I find they aren’t as well-written or as well-plotted or as well-executed as I remember. Sometimes I find I no longer agree with the ideologies presented. And sometimes this is even enough to bring the rating down a star or two, depending on the book.
But here’s the thing, if I’ve fallen in love with a book, really truly fallen in love with a book, I hate taking its five-star badge away, even if I realize later on that it doesn’t quite merit that distinction. I have a self-destructive streak in me, a part of me that tries to rob me of the few things that bring me heaps of happiness. That is why, for several years, I would shelve books midway through even when I was really enjoying them. To deny that something has given me great happiness in favor of a more logical, objective approach is to rob myself of one more happy memory.
When I love something, it’s only half involuntary. The other half of the time, I make the choice to love, because love is a choice. So when I have chosen to love a story, I will choose to love it despite its flaws unless something is able to convince me, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that that story is no longer worthy of my love (this has not happened to me yet, but it has with many fans of THE MISTS OF AVALON, so you can never be too sure). This might mean I end up giving a higher star rating to a book that I wouldn’t necessarily rate the same way if I were reading it for the first time now. I think that’s okay. I think that’s my prerogative, to give dignity to my childhood self by valuing something the little girl in me valued.
Does this mean my ratings are subjective? Yes, of course it does. All ratings are subjective. Does this mean people won’t always like the books I give five stars, even though they typically like what I like? Sure. I can’t please everyone. I shouldn’t try. Does this mean my ratings are set in stone? No. I allow myself to go back and lower or raise ratings if my thoughts change over time. But after much consideration, I have realized that letting myself rate a book what I want to rate it is the most honest option in this situation, regardless of anything else. So that is what I will continue to do.
What about you, my little coffee beans? What is your rating system? What factors determine how you rate a book? Have you reread a childhood book, only to find you don't love it anymore?
