I’ve been thinking a lot lately about ratings, and what constitutes a 4 or 3 star rating. It was especially apparent after I finished the Beginning of Everything by Robyn Schneider.
I liked the book, it was pretty good, I was going to give it a 4 star rating. Then I looked at what other people had to say on Goodreads, and there were a lot of low star ratings. After reading why those people rated the book low, I began to agree with them. And that’s when I stopped to actually think.
If I never read the Goodreads reviews, this book would have been given a 4 stars by me, but after reading those reviews, I gave it a 3.5. Is that fair?
I think that it might be.
Let me explain. A lot of the Outlander books by Diana Gaboldon have low ratings too, but after giving Outlander a 5 stars and going to check the low ratings and reviews, nothing that the reviews said would make me change my mind about my 5 star rating.
People ranted at how much they disliked the book and I ignored them and still went with a 5 star rating.
With the Beginning of Everything however, the bad reviews made me wonder if maybe I should lower my rating…
I guess it depends on how strongly the book made you feel.
With the Beginning of Everything I was struggling between 3 and 4 stars, so the other reviews made up my mind because they pointed out the flaws in the books that I remember thinking while reading, but forgot after finishing.
Outlander on the other hand was an absolute 5 stars in my head, and nothing anyone said could change my mind.
What about you? Do other people’s reviews or ratings ever change your mind about how you rate a book? Though I’m not exactly proud about this, I think it’s very much true in the book reviewing world at times.
Let’s discuss it!
P.S. I proofread this post! -from Calliope’s annoying friend Jem
P.P.S. Haha, my friend’s initials are J.E.M, like Jem Carstairs, I always find that funny