tinkerdan
∞<Q-Satis
I think there's a lot of difference between a review and a critical review and I would have to agree with some that if you find you are doing the critical review all the time then you might want to keep that to your own website and that you are spending more time going through the material to make sure you are accurate.
If you are doing standard reviews, then there is a bit of etiquette that goes with those that you might want to understand. Once you start fearing that what you write might hurt you(come back to haunt you); you can be certain that you are crossing a line. On the other hand there is much to say toward finding some way to warn people about certain books that often beg that you cross that line. But that would neither be a review or a critical review; rather it would be a warning labeled simply Caveat Emptor.
If you are an author then you won't be able to escape the label of scratching the other authors back so you either except that; or allow the few trolls who might say this, to scare you away from endorsing a book you truly do love.
There are plenty of occasions where an author does endorse another author and many when they won't because some authors value their own work to the point that they don't want to put it at risk by taking a chance in endorsing another author's work unless perhaps they are approached through their publisher and agent for such an endorsement. In this case they are scratching the back of the publisher.
Of course there is the other argument I've heard that reviews don't make that much difference these days so perhaps someone might write reviews for the same reason they write books. They write them first and foremost for themselves. If someone else enjoys it or benefits from it then that's just a bit of added value.
Either way if your own personal reputation is of the most value over other things, to you, then you probably want to steer clear of writing reviews. It's the same as writing itself; because you are putting yourself out there to be judged and in turn reviewed for what you've written.
If writing reviews someone else might criticize makes you uncomfortable; writing a novel will put you in the same place.
If you are doing standard reviews, then there is a bit of etiquette that goes with those that you might want to understand. Once you start fearing that what you write might hurt you(come back to haunt you); you can be certain that you are crossing a line. On the other hand there is much to say toward finding some way to warn people about certain books that often beg that you cross that line. But that would neither be a review or a critical review; rather it would be a warning labeled simply Caveat Emptor.
If you are an author then you won't be able to escape the label of scratching the other authors back so you either except that; or allow the few trolls who might say this, to scare you away from endorsing a book you truly do love.
There are plenty of occasions where an author does endorse another author and many when they won't because some authors value their own work to the point that they don't want to put it at risk by taking a chance in endorsing another author's work unless perhaps they are approached through their publisher and agent for such an endorsement. In this case they are scratching the back of the publisher.
Of course there is the other argument I've heard that reviews don't make that much difference these days so perhaps someone might write reviews for the same reason they write books. They write them first and foremost for themselves. If someone else enjoys it or benefits from it then that's just a bit of added value.
Either way if your own personal reputation is of the most value over other things, to you, then you probably want to steer clear of writing reviews. It's the same as writing itself; because you are putting yourself out there to be judged and in turn reviewed for what you've written.
If writing reviews someone else might criticize makes you uncomfortable; writing a novel will put you in the same place.