Tuesday, August 2, 2016

On Reviewing Less

Banner featuring seven pieces of crumbled white paper to the right side of the frame on a coral background. To the left, white text reads, 'On Reviewing Less'

When I started this blog a couple years back, I decided I’d write about only those books I wanted to write about. Not necessarily the ones I loved the most; the ones I wanted to discuss in a public fashion, at greater length than Twitter allows.

The longer I keep this no-longer-new blog going, though, the fewer proper reviews I write. Every Sunday I pen quick takes and mini reviews, some of which stretch to more words than other peoples’ proper reviews, but I don’t often sit down and write the sort of responses that really dig into the mechanics of the thing.

I’ve been asking myself why that is.

At least part of it is that the sort of reviews I prefer to write, if I’m gonna write them at all, take an enormous amount of time and mental energy. I side-eye all those people on social media who’re like, “It takes no time at all to leave a review! Do ittttttt!” because it takes me for frickin’ ever. I understand that sites like Amazon look at quantity over quality, but I can rarely bring myself to put a simple, “I liked it! You should read it!” out into the world.

So I write more involved reviews, in three stages. Stage One is a bullet point outline that’s really more like a rough draft. Stage Two is a proper rough draft with actual paragraphs and full sentences. Stage Three is revision, with a possible Stage Four in the mix if I feel like I need to tinker a bit more. It takes time, and it can be draining.

It can also be fun, of course, which is why I still do it. I like sharing my enthusiasm for the books I’ve loved. I like examining why the books I disliked didn’t work for me. I like having a review to link to whenever I want y’all to pay especial attention to a title.

Except these days, I’m far less likely to open Scrivener and start writing about whatever I’ve just finished. While my lengthy process is certainly part of it, I think it’s mostly about the nature of my passion for the books I’ve connected with over the last year.

I engage with things in two basic ways: logically and emotionally. Logical books excite me on an intellectual level. I’m so pumped about how they accomplish their goals that I want to break it all down for y’all so you can be excited about it, too.

Emotional books speak to something deep inside me; something I don’t necessarily want to put into words, which never come easy for me. I have to fight for them, then I have to fight some more to get ‘em in the right order and make sure none of them are misleading and/or offensive (and sometimes I still fail). I don’t want to fight that battle with the books that hit me hard and heavy. I’d rather just feel stuff about them.

If I could open a direct line from my brain to yours, we’d be golden. Since we can’t...

Well. Here we are with our dearth of proper(ish) reviews.

Of course, many of my most beloved books hit me both logically and emotionally. I feel deeply about them, and I’m excited about all the things they do with narrative structure and character development and all that. So I sit down and I outline my thoughts, then put them into proper paragraphs, then edit them. Then I schedule them, giving myself some lead time in case I realize I’ve gotten something Very, Very Wrong and I need to swoop in and edit some more.

Recently, Guy Gavriel Kay’s CHILDREN OF EARTH AND SKY fell into this category. The book hit me where it counted, and it also gave me plenty to think about in terms of narrative and intertextuality. I opened Scrivener, worked through it all on the screen, and shared it with the world.

For the most part, though, the books I’ve really liked haven’t excited me enough that I want to write about them and the books I’ve loved have weighed more heavily in favour of the Dionysiac than the Apollonian; which is to say, my responses to them are chaotic and highly emotional, rather than well-reasoned.

Sometimes I go ahead and have myself a gush-fest anyways, as I did most recently with THE RAVEN KING by Maggie Stiefvater. More often, I use Murchie Plus Books to say how much I loved the thing, then shut up about it except when I have the opportunity to rec it to someone, usually in ALL CAPS with LOTS OF EXCLAMATION POINTS!!!!! or the verbal equivalent thereof.

This decision to keep (sorta) quiet is partly down to the time and energy factor, partly down to my persistent difficulty in getting words to go in the right order, and partly because I don’t always want to analyze anything I love so desperately. I don’t always want to be in a position where I’ve gotta look at this thing I fell for--this thing that became vitally important to me over a few precious days--and say, “Yeah, well, here are its flaws.”

Which you kind of have to do if you’re gonna write a proper review. You have to say, "Let’s talk about how the text fails as well as how it succeeds.”

Sometimes you can do that in an aside of sorts. Sometimes you really can’t.

Several years ago, Daniel Abraham wrote a piece for Clarkesworld about why he doesn’t review. I nodded along, and to this day it’s influenced the way I discuss certain subjects. For example, I made a deliberate choice not to write many serious things about TV because I recognize it’s often an innately dissatisfying medium and I want it to remain more entertaining than frustrating. I don’t want to ignore its flaws, but neither do I want those flaws to eclipse the things I love about it.

I’m getting close to that point with books, too. I’ve done my time on the criticism front. I’ve spent years upon years considering structure and character development and worldbuilding, to the point where this sort of analysis is more or less automatic. I’ve looked at strengths and flaws and all that other stuff you’re supposed to look at when you analyze a text, and I’ve taken the time to write out what I’ve learned. Sometimes I’ve even put the words in the right order.

Now it’s time to scale back. I’m still gonna review stuff, of course, because I’m always gonna be at least a little bit Apollonian, but I won’t review as much. Hell, it’s entirely possible my Best of 2016 list will be packed with things I never said a formal word about.

Because right now, the Dionysiac part of me is ascendant. I don’t want to analyze everything anymore. I want to feel instead.

18 comments:

  1. I hear you. My posts are nothing like yours, but I still have a hard time reviewing books anymore... I have so many started and instead I end up just talking about them in my Sunday post and that's it. It is why I considered stopping blogging entirely, but I do like the social interaction that comes from blogging so I stick it out even though my blog is pretty boring! (That being said I blogged Sunday, today, and have a post scheduled for Thurs. Unheard of for me!)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The social part is definitely my favourite bit, but I find I interact way more on Twitter and Instagram these days. It's easier to have a conversation over there than it is via comments sections, especially since I often get this weird comment-replying anxiety that keeps me from answering everyone for a day or twenty.

      Delete
  2. This is so close to where I'm at right now! I don't feel up to reviewing some books that were just meh and I also don't feel like reviewing books I loved because I don't want to dissect them and destroy the magic feels. I used to blog every single book I read and I just can't do that anymore but now I'm wondering how I should choose at all which books to write actual posts about. I think your Murchie plus Books posts are perfect. Maybe I need some way like that to mention but not always necessarily dissect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Murchie posts have really helped me feel like I'm still sharing books without dissecting everything. I hope you find a solution that works for you!

      Delete
  3. Personally I feel like I just have nothing to say about the books I'm reading atm. I don't really love or hate the lot of them, either. Maybe it's just my mood...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I often get that way, too. There's little point in reviewing something if all I really have to say is, "It's a book and I read it and I didn't hate it."

      Delete
  4. I've been having a hard time with writing reviews lately. I think you do more thoughtful and in-depth reviews than me, but even so, lately I just can't get myself to do it. Plus, I didn't read nearly as much in July as I usually do, which means fewer books to potentially review, and then I can't schedule reviews out in advance, which makes more pressure, which makes me worse at it. The struggle is real.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ugh, I find it soooooooo much harder to blog when I don't have things to schedule in advance. Holy pressure, Batman. Lately, I've been trying to plot things out a week or two ahead, but I usually fail because it takes me so long to put words in the right order.

      Delete
  5. Oh, Memory. I relate to a lot of things here. I hear you on not wanting to have to pick apart a book you've only just fallen in love with but also not wanting to succumb to the urge to gush, gush, gush. It can be so hard to strike that balance just right, and lately I just haven't even wanted to try!

    For all that you worry about getting your words right, I think you've nailed it here with the dichotomy of logic vs. emotion. I tend to want to shout about things that have made me think more deeply or given me new perspectives on old topics, and it seems easier to do so because it feels less subjective. When a book just slams you in the heart, it's so much harder to explain.

    Thanks so much for sharing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep - I have all of these sentiments.

      I think as well sometimes we feel like we have to blog/review just to keep the posts ticking over and it takes a bit of joy out of the whole process.
      And sometimes books from publishers give me a headache - I read one recently that I enjoyed while reading, but when I got to the end I couldn't think why I actually enjoyed it. It was colourful, but bland - how do you put that into words?

      Delete
    2. We all need those SFnal devices that let us share empathic reactions.

      Delete
    3. I hear you, Heather. With those sorts of books, I feel like the most substantive thing I have to say about them is, "It was really entertaining, but I don't think it'll stay with me." And that doesn't require a full review.

      Delete
  6. I totally get this entire post. Reviews take a lot of time and emotional energy, and it's more than people realize. And I get so many ideas for other kinds of posts (like that Pokemon GO post about virtual reality in books that I never wrote) but by the time I get through my reviews, the moment for them has passed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes! I've got heaps of half-drafted posts about other things, but so often everyone's talking about something else by the time I get the urge to go back and fine tune them.

      Delete
  7. Yes to all of this! I think that the reason Regular Rumination felt like it didn't really have a place in my life is because I got tired of writing full reviews and I didn't know how to blog about other things. I'm trying it out again and we'll see how it all goes. I'm also totally on board with what you said about reviewing television. I once tried to write a review of Friday Night Lights and it just went miserably. One of the things I miss most about working in publishing is having a ton of people I work with excited to hear about books I've loved and ready to share their favorite books. It was basically a given that everyone there loved to read. I have to try a lot harder at small talk now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I try to ask people what they're reading instead of, like, what line of work they're in (because that's the most boring question ever), and I never know what to say when they aren't reading anything right now, or when they don't read full stop. Horrors!

      Delete
  8. (I'm two months late on this comment, but this post has been hanging out in my Pocket because I wanted to comment on it! My apologies!)

    I completely feel you. It's the whole reason I retired The Literary Omnivore and struck up something else, where I can talk about what I want to talk about regarding the media I've consumed in the last week without having to sit down and adhere to a formula or word count to engage with it. It was useful when I was younger, I think, but now it's second nature and I'm a different person.

    Godspeed with your new direction, friend.

    ReplyDelete