e-mail

In Retrospect

termscontactsearch
rss

I mentioned in my 2008 wrap-up post that I might change how and/or when rate a book.

In 2007, I did not rate the books until the end of the year.  By having to think back and re-read reviews, I was able to sift through and determine which books still stood out in my mind (5), which were good/enjoyable reads (4 and 3), and which were okay and not-so-okay (2 and 1).

In 2008, I rated each book after I finished it.

Looking back — and trying to decided which of the 19 5-star books were my favorite of the year —  I saw immediately that books like Personal Demons by Stacia Kane and Nightkeepers Jessica Andersen (books that still stand out in my mind) wouldn’t even be in the top 20, let alone the top 10.  And  there were a few sentimental 5-star books — the Gilded Age mystery series books with Nell Sweeney, for instance.  I loved the series as a whole, and loved Nell and Will — but in retrospect, I would have given some/all of them 3 or 4 stars (I read four books last year)

Now that I’ve tried both ways, I think that the 2007 method was more accurate than last year’s.  Therefore, starting with the review of Dawnkeepers, the rating will be left blank — or TBA (to be annonced) — until the end of the year.  The exceptions will be books that are Did Not Finish (if I even bother trying to review it), and books I absolutely know aren’t going more than a 2-star — I think those will be few, easy to figure out, and my opinion is not likely to change with the passage of time.

 The two books I’ve already rated (Hail to the Chef and Innocence Unveiled) will retain their ratings.

Christina

Comments are closed.

e-mail