Are Book Rating Systems Futile?

The answer would appear to be yes. If we exclude academics and professional critics, rating books is opinion-based, and opinions, as we all know, are far from universal, standardized, or even at times completely rational. Hell, full reviews are still opinion-based but at least provide more detailed reasons for liking and disliking a book. (For the clarity of this discussion, rating systems are what I’m classifying as simplified headings or markers of what a reviewer thought of a book/story in addition or in place of a more in-depth review such as the five star rating system seen on Goodreads and many other websites that offer product reviews). For many, books are a form of entertainment, but when rating entertainment, can a rating system ever be completely accurate? The answer at first glance would appear to be no. Entertainment is subjective and hard to measure or compare. Several issues arise such as rating personal entertainment vs. quality, ratings from reviewer to reviewer, and the evolution of the reviewer.

Take Goodreads, a site for book reviews, giveaways, reading challenges, etc., which operates on a five star rating system. Many of my books in the same star rating aren’t easily comparable. The Old Man and the Sea, Beautiful Creatures, and To Kill A Mockingbird all have the same three star rating (as far as what I rated them), but they are by far very different books that stars can’t indicate. By rating each of these books as three stars, I am by no means saying that Beautiful Creatures is on par with To Kill A Mockingbird. Huhhhh?

I know, I know. Yet, on a shallow, cursory level it might appear as exactly that. The issue becomes what does the rating mean or, to phrase it differently, what exactly are the stars rating? Personal enjoyment? Literary value? Quality of writing? Characters? World-building? Many a time I would want to rate a book lower because I didn’t enjoy it, but I would then feel guilty because nothing is per se “wrong” with the book other than it wasn’t the book for me. Therefore, it is highly likely that I can rate Beautiful Creatures three stars for very different reasons than To Kill A Mockingbird. And I can’t be the only one with this problem right? So, if one reviewer’s ratings can vary from book to book, then it’s pretty possible that the nuance of meanings widen when looking from reviewer to reviewer.

Thus, if one person’s ratings from book to book aren’t always comparable, how can ratings be in any way measured from reviewer to reviewer? Do you consider the three star rating as “Good”, “Eh”, or “Has Some Potential”? That alone could alter dramatically how a reviewer rates their books and how you view their ratings.

If a reviewer only lists a book as three stars on Goodreads (versus also having a more in-depth review), is that a book that you would pick up? Or are fours and fives the only books worth your time? Suddenly, the very reviews we go to to determine our purchases seem so arbitrary, if not ridiculous. Yet despite these flaws, book rating systems are everywhere from Amazon to the blog of yours truly, and many of us still use these reviews to shape our opinions.

The issue becomes compounded further if we consider the evolution of the reader/reviewer. There’s no guarantee that I would rate the books I read in high school the same way. In fact, I know from rereading those books and my reviews of them that many of my views have dramatically changed. College classes I’ve taken have changed how I view science fiction and nonfiction, and there are millions of little experiences between my high school years and now that have changed how I view certain types of characters and circumstances. And while I don’t think anyone would doubt that, I believe we all experience even more subtle changes throughout the year: reading ruts, preferences, mood changes, and so on. Perhaps the book we didn’t like a couple months ago was because we weren’t in the mood for that type of book? Or we would have liked that book if we had had a friend recommend that we read past the first 100 pages of backstory? Or perhaps we didn’t quite understand that character or situation at the time? Who knows. Reading is far more complex and subtle than what we sometimes give it credit for which makes the art of reviewing so much harder.

I have found this out first hand with this blog. When I first made my rating system, it seemed clever, funny, and appropriate for me and the platform. However, as I began to use it, I found out more and more that instead of it being my tool I was becoming its slave. I used the American grading system to grade 6 components that I thought were needed in a successful story to average an overall grade. Over time I found that my feelings for how much I enjoyed a book tended to conflict with how I would rate the quality. I might want to rate the components (like world-building, characters, plot, etc.) B’s, but didn’t agree with the overall grade it would lead to (B=Must Read). Thus, the component grades and the overall grades always seemed to struggle for control. To think that I thought that this rating system would be more accurate and understandable than the simplified five star rating system seen on Goodreads!

Then why is it that so many people on Goodreads alone still rate their books? Does it serve as a public, online reminder of why we liked or disliked a book? Do we have an instinctive need to measure and rate our experiences and compare? Perhaps, both but I think there’s something more to it. Sometimes reviews can be experiences within themselves. Some of my favorite reviewers on Goodreads have amazing wit and snark with a critical eye. I might not always use their reviews as a gauge on what to read but as entertainment in and of itself. Other reviewers I read because they are detailed and balanced with a similar interest to my own. These are the reviews I look to for my to-read list not because they are universally accurate but because they are in line with my own interests. In a way, I end up feeling closer to the reviewer for their personal touch and the overlapping interests we share and thus the reviews begin to feel more like friendly advice than a dictation on good or bad literature.

Ratings might be flawed, but I don’t foresee it going away any time soon. When done well, it can be informative as well as fun. It gives us insight into each other interests, serves as entertainment, and can hopefully help us pick a good book. There are millions upon millions of books and more reviews than we can ever read. Whether its a star rating from Goodreads or my flawed grading system, hopefully ratings will save people from some really bad books and direct them toward the good ones.

So how do you guys feel about ratings and reviews? How do you feel about the five star rating system? Also, if you have time, please look at the rating system below and let me know if you would like it better than the one I currently have. If you guys agree that this one is better, I’ll be doing away with the grades and the components and instead try to go more in-depth in my reviews. My goal with this rating system is to be more in line with how I view the book as far as enjoyment without degrading the ones that just weren’t my cup of tea.

Rating System:

Rereadable

Totally Readable

Readable

Barely Readable

Unreadable

Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett Review

Fiction

413 pages

According to The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch (the world's only completely accurate book of prophecies, written in 1655, before she exploded), the world will end on a Saturday. Next Saturday, in fact. Just before dinner.

So the armies of Good and Evil are amassing, Atlantis is rising, frogs are falling, tempers are flaring. Everything appears to be going according to Divine Plan. Except a somewhat fussy angel and a fast-living demon—both of whom have lived amongst Earth's mortals since The Beginning and have grown rather fond of the lifestyle—are not actually looking forward to the coming Rapture.

And someone seems to have misplaced the Antichrist . . .

Completion: B+
Writing/Style: D-
Characters: C-
Plot/Pacing: D-
World-building/Atmosphere: D-
Sub-genres (Romance, Humor, Mystery, etc.): F

Final Grade: D- At Your Own Risk

This book bummed me out so much. I wanted to like it so much, but instead it was a chore to read. Between the ridiculous quirkiness and constantly changing point of view, there was no tension in the plot or emotional investment in the characters. Even though things do happen in the book, the pace just feels like it always meanders on detours to try to be funny or quirky. Some of the characters had potential, but they never become anything more than quirky, shallow stereotypes. Since there was such a drive for everyone and everything to be quirky, no one seemed to react naturally or believably which really reduced the possible tension to next to nothing. It just felt as if this book was built on some great philosophical ideas that never grew into an organic story and was trying to mask it with humor that’s just not my cup of tea. In fact, this book was written as if it was the funniest thing in the world, and every line was a big joke. Instead, I just felt left out of the joke. I laughed only once and it took to page 83 (the hellhound naming scene, for those who have read the book) for even that. I had always heard that Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett were gods of writing, but I was very disappointed in this book. Sad to say, but I wouldn't have even finished it if I didn’t have this book blog to think about. However, I think what disappoints me the most is the glimmers of a good book (or at least some good lines and ideas) that popped up every now and again. One line toward the end brings up the idea that the conflict of the world is less like chess and more like God playing Solitaire which I thought was brilliant. And the ending held some strong lines and imagery that created a surge of nostalgia which was equally surprising as it was refreshing since most of the book left me dead and dull. This is the second book of Gaiman's I've read so I'm starting to come to the conclusion his books just might not be for me. Le sigh...on to the next book.

The Old Man and The Sea by Ernest Hemingway Review

Fiction

132 pages

Here, for a change, is a fish tale that actually does honor to the author. The Old Man & the Sea revived Hemingway's career, which was foundering under the weight of such postwar stinkers as Across the River & into the Trees. It also led directly to his receipt of the 1954 Nobel Prize--an award he gladly accepted, despite his earlier observation that "no son of a bitch that ever won the Nobel Prize ever wrote anything worth reading afterwards". A half century later, it's still easy to see why. This tale of an aged Cuban fisherman going head-to-head with a magnificent marlin encapsulates Hemingway's favorite motifs of physical & moral challenge. The Old Man & the Sea was, in any case, the last great catch of Hemingway's career.

Completion: A+
Writing/Style: B
Characters: B+
Plot/Pacing: B-
World-building/Atmosphere: B
Sub-genres (Romance, Humor, Mystery, etc.): N/A

Final Grade: B+ Must Read

This novel was a happy surprise since most of my friends have told me how much they hate Hemingway, and I have had very little exposure to his work. However, even though I ended up enjoying it much more than I expected, I still find that it, along with some other books I have read recently, this book has made me acknowledge the flaws in my rating system and perhaps the flaw of any rating system.

 For a story that comprises mostly of one character alone for a long stretch of time doing only one thing, The Old Man and The Sea was a compelling read. It takes a great talent to make one character by himself interesting and dynamic and to have to a writing style that constantly drives his journey forward without losing steam. Of course, there is no need for me to overly praise Hemingway’s skill for there would be a line of people behind me ready to prove me wrong if I had said otherwise.

However, I wouldn’t say that the final grade isn’t completely accurate. I thought the story was good (don’t get me wrong!), but is it really worthy of a Must Read? I found this book a mild enjoyment that convinced me to follow through to the end, but ended with a reasonable but not particularly satisfying ending. I think if you are interested or curious in classics it wouldn’t be a bad one to check out, but I can’t honestly say that you must read it.

Yet, I found myself in the dilemma that I couldn’t bring the final grade down without making it appear that one of the six subcategories was lesser than what I thought it was. How am I to balance these two issues? I’m not quite sure yet. Perhaps, I will redo my rating system. Perhaps, not. In the near future, I might write a Topics post on the accuracy of rating systems. But for now, just know that The Old Man and The Sea didn’t blow me out of the water but did succeed in pushing me to its ending and to trying out more Hemingway books.