A cheat sheet to critical reviews

Written by: Kelly on March 5, 2012.

Back in January, I talked a bit about why being critical matters. I’m still thinking about the things in that post and I’m always going to be an advocate for being critical and being classy.

As you know, we’re critical reviewers here. We like to look at books in depth and talk about the things that do and don’t work in a story. Something I’ve been asked often — and even more so after posting about the topic of being critical — is how I approach reading and reviewing a book. More specifically, what elements do I think about and how do I think about them then take those considerations and write a review.

This was sort of what inspired the original KidLitCon presentation last year, and when we build our presentation, one of the elements was a cheat sheet to review writing. In all honesty, I sort of forgot about it until the other night, and I thought it would be worth sharing. This was a collaborative effort, with help and insight from Abby, Janssen, and Julia. You’re welcome to borrow it, share it, and any insights you may have you’re welcome to add, as well. I hope it’s helpful not only in giving insight into what goes into a critical review, but I hope it’s helpful in shedding insight into critical reading and critical blogging, as well.

Critical review cheat sheet

If you’re looking to freshen your content or are just getting started in blogging, here are some “big” things worth considering. These can assist in blog consistency or in helping establish your voice in the blogosphere, and they help when you fall into one of those sticky situations when it comes to comments or feedback you may get from readers.

– Summary vs. Publisher Copy: Do you want to write your own summary or rely on publisher copy? Your interpretation may differ from the publishers, and there is nothing wrong with that. It is essential, though, if you do borrow publisher copy that you cite your source (i.e., publisher’s copy, GoodReads summary, Amazon summary).

– Substance vs. length: How much you write in your review doesn’t matter. There are good short reviews and there are weak long reviews. It’s about substance, not length. Finding your own reviewing voice will guide you to this.

– Spoilers and content concerns: Do you write your review with acknowledgment to spoilers? Do you warn your readers when spoilers appear? What’s the length of time when spoiler warnings are not necessary? What about content – do you discuss issues of language or situations which may make readers uncomfortable?

– Your readership: Do you blog to be a resource for teachers/educators? For causal readers? To keep a record of what you read for yourself? For book publicity/as a means of PR for books and authors? Consider this when structuring your reviews. What’s your end goal? Write and review toward that. And remember: this can change. Nothing’s set in stone.

If you’re looking for some ideas of what to do when critically reviewing, here are a few suggestions. Not all reviews need all of these. In fact, you might find it worthwhile to talk in depth about only one of these issues or none of these issues. This is meant to be a helpful cheat sheet for those times when a book is simply a “meh” book — one you are struggling to review because it wasn’t great and it wasn’t terrible — and you need to find words to put to that feeling. The list below is certainly not exhaustive.

– Character Development: Do you find them fully-fleshed or lacking in development (is there an arc)? How does the main character interact with secondary characters? Are relationships believable? Does the dialog aid in their development?

– Story Pacing: Is the story consistent in pacing or uneven? Is it a quick read or a slow read? Did some parts become weak because of the pacing?

– Cohesion and Flow: Does the storyline work? Is it fluid? Is it rocky? Does it flow right, whether it’s meant to be a linear story or not? In short, does it make sense or does it leave the reader confused? Is that intentional within the story or a fault of the writing/characters/dialog?

– Language and Writing: Is it a literary masterpiece? Are the metaphors smooth like honey or are they distracting like flies? Is it poorly written? This is an opportunity to talk about things like length, too, as well as editing. Could it have been tightened or lengthened? Did the writing heighten the story or was it merely serviceable?

– Authenticity (to the character, to the story, to the setting, to the time period, to the intended audience): Do you believe it? This is especially helpful in non-contemporary works. Did you believe the world building? The mystery? The characters? The situations? Was the setting developed or was it forgotten about? Are historical elements authentic? Is this book going to meet the expectations of the intended audience? Does the book feel real? Are the teenagers/middle schoolers/preschoolers depicted believable or are they inauthentic? This is trust in the story and trust in the writing and, over time, perhaps trust in the author him/her self.

– Voice: Does the story have a voice? A feeling to it? Does the character have a voice? It’s not an easy topic to talk about, especially with the “meh” book, because often, that’s the problem with the “meh” book: there’s NOT a voice. A voice is the tone of the book, the feeling underscoring the story, and the thing that can ultimately be what is most memorable about a story or a character.

– Reader Appeal: This one is dependent on your blog’s goals. Who will the book appeal to? Does it appeal to fans of other authors? To certain genre readers? This is a fun but challenging aspect of critical reviews because it requires removing your own biases about the critical elements listed above and thinking about big picture readership.

So there it is — I hope it’s helpful or insightful, and if there’s anything you consider in reading/writing critically, share away.

Comments