Some like it hot, some like it cold - On reader reviews, by Harini Nagendra

Some like it hot, some like it cold. Some like it in the pot, nine days old.

What's your favourite positive review, and worst negative review, and how did they make you feel? Tell us, really.  

Reviews, especially book reviews, are the subjective opinions of readers. As writers, we love having reviews. A book which generates thousands of reviews on Goodreads, Amazon and other platforms from readers, helps to spread the word to other readers. In today’s information age, reviews are the equivalent of word-to-mouth recommendations. As writers, we all solicit reviews and are very grateful for readers who take the time to read and review our books.

But reviewers differ in their views. Some love characterization, others like twisty plots. Some want long books, others like them crisp and short. Some readers like their books happy and upbeat, others seek out horror and gore.

As a (relatively) new-to-fiction author, I found it useful to compare reader reviews to academic peer review, which is how scientific publications make it to press – a process which I’m far more familiar with, having dealt with it for over 30 years.

A fiction book goes through multiple drafts, after which the author gets reviews from friends, family, and other writers as informal alpha and beta readers. These reviews usually remain private, as feedback used by the author to rewrite their book. The book then may go to some combination of a developmental editor, agent, copy editor and publisher for more edits, again kept out of the public domain (this varies depending on the writer’s route to publication).Eventually, the book goes to market and then finds its way into the hands of readers and reviewers who publish reviews online, for everyone to read and share. After the book is published.

In contrast, academic papers and books must go through peer review before publication. The reviewers remain anonymous, but they are also experts in the same field. Peer reviewer feedback can be pretty brutal on occasion. As an example, one of my papers received a review that said we were “literally trying to squeeze blood out of a stone.” It’s difficult to ignore these reviews – you have to revise your manuscript and craft a response that satisfies the reviewer – otherwise, your paper or book doesn’t go through to publication. It doesn’t matter how famous you are, or how well established - know Nobel Laureates whose papers have been rejected because of anonymous peer review.  

The process is very useful when it works, though. I have learnt much from my reviewers – whether about alternate analytical methods, new sources of literature, or better ways to interpret the significance of my data. Also: academic peer reviewers don’t get paid for the time and energy they spend on reading and commenting on my work – it’s a voluntary service. I benefit from peer reviews on my papers, and in turn, I provide the same service to others. A little help makes the (academic) world go around.

This process different in some important ways from the reviews I receive as a fiction author. The service provided by readers is  voluntary, honest feedback. But it’s not a a barrier to publication, as the reviews come in after the book is published. That said, they are useful for a writer who wants to improve her craft, so I read all my reader reviews.

Fortunately, 32 years of academic peer review have grown me a rhinoceros skin. I can now read all my reviews, thousands – even the most critical ones – and not take them too much to heart. As long as no one is telling me that I’m trying to squeeze blood from a stone, it’s fine. (Yeah, ok, that one stung).

But I’m trained to think of reviews as a way to provide feedback, so that I can improve my craft. One reviewer pointed out that I overuse an adjective in my description of setting. They were right! I am very fond of this word. Now I know, and can catch it, at least in subsequent books.

Sometimes reviewers provide varied feedback contradict. For instance, one reviewer says my books have “too much set up” and another says “I love the setting.” One reader finds my books twisty, another says it’s predictable.

At other times, I disagree with readers.

For instance, one reviewer said Kaveri has “the perfect husband who not only supports his wife’s educational ambitions but makes her coffee. This does not sound like any Indian family or husband I have met either in fiction or in life.”

Such a blanket dismissal of all Indian men! My books are set in the 1920s – and my father was born in 1930, not too far off from those times. He taught me how to cook. His father, born in 1897, was also a good cook. And they were definitely not anomalies, even for their times.

But I also received another review from a reader based in the US, appreciating the fact that I do not ‘pathologize the suffering of Indian women.’ When I read that, I wanted to hug her. Because that’s what I was getting at!

All in all, getting reader feedback is great, whether positive or negative. A reader took the time to read my book, and to tell me what they thought. And I’m grateful.