Talking about books I don’t like.

Talking about books I don’t like.

In a recent newsletter I shared a dilemma with you: how do I talk about books I don’t like here on the blog?

This topic is especially relevant right now. Right after that newsletter went out, I dove headlong into summer reading guide prep. I’ve read a dozen novels this month that won’t be published for another month or five: novels that haven’t been reviewed yet, novels that I can’t feel out by listening to other readers’ opinions.

A whole lot of them just aren’t very good.

I don’t want to slam anybody’s book. Real people write novels, after all, and I don’t want to stomp all over their work. But I don’t want you to waste ten hours reading a book that’s not any good, especially not if I knew it and could have warned you!

In the midst of this inner debate, I read something in Lauren Winner’s memoir Still: Notes on a Mid-Faith Crisis that is shaping my approach to dud novels. She wasn’t talking about book reviews; she was probing her complicated relationship with her mother. No matter. She introduced me to art critic Peter Schjeldahl’s rules of thumb for reviewing works he doesn’t like—or, as he delightfully puts it, “work that isn’t immediately congenial.” He asks himself:

What would I like about this if I liked it? That is, I sort of project in my mind somebody who thinks, “Wow, this is great, this is what I like.” And sometimes that idea in my head persuades me, and I come around. I come around a little bit. Sometimes I agree to disagree.

He goes on to say:

If that fails, then I sort of back up and say, “What would somebody who likes this be like?” Then it becomes sort of sociological. Then I’m writing about a taste. Sometimes I might think it’s a reprehensible taste in some way and write negatively. Other times it’s just, “Look what camel has walked into the tent.”

My friend Heather, who works in publishing, says there are no bad books, only books that haven’t found the right reader. I wouldn’t go that far. I’m careful about what I read, and I’ve still read some pretty horrible books. (Most of those just needed another round of edits, but that’s another story for another day.)

But there’s a lot of truth to what Heather says. We read for different reasons, we approach books with differing expectations, we all have different taste. When I’m talking books with you, the most unhelpful things you can say to me are I liked it or I didn’t. I need to know why, and how. I need to know where the story stumbled and where it sung. I need to know what you specifically loved, or exactly what turned you off. If you don’t give me details, how can I know if I would like it or not?

This spring, prepare yourself for a lot of delicate reviews of books I didn’t like. I’ll be using this framework, and I’m hopeful—excited, even—about being able to discuss the books I didn’t love (at all) in way that feels fair, and gentle, and useful.

Do you hesitate to criticize books you don’t like? How do you approach this subject? Any tips or advice?

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestEmail this to someonePrint this page


  1. Noga says:

    I’m joinging the conversation way after it’s ended, but still, I’d like to add a thought. When I was 18 I was tour guide in a Field School located in the Jerusalem Hills (Israel). This is a profession that demands constant learning, and once in a while we would go on study-tours with veteran tour guides to deepen our knowledge or get to know a new area, trail, or topic. Our time was precious (we often had very little time to study between tours)- and so we were all very upset one day when a study-tour was exceptionally shallow and unhelpful. On the way back, I ranted to the Field School manager about the time wasted, and all the productive things I could have done with it instead of going on this lousy tour… ANd this is what he said to me: “Noga, there’s no such thing as a wasted tour; from every tour there’s something to learn, and this time- it’s how NOT to give a tour!”. Also with books- a book I “hate” is one that teaches me more about the genres, eras, or writing styles that I actually enjoy. *This is also an opportunity to tell you, Anne, how much I appreciate your podcast. It’s opened new reading worlds for me. Thank you!

  2. Brandyn says:

    I’m in a very different situation than you, Anne, because I don’t have any expectation that other people are reading my reviews. When I review books on Goodreads it’s for my benefit – so one year or five years later I can remember what I was thinking.

    My favorite trick when reading other people’s reviews of contentious books – find detailed 3 star reviews. 5 star and 1 star reviews tend to be overly emotional; a 3 star review will highlight the good points and some bad and will give me a clue whether the issues with the book are things that bug me personally.

    • Debbie says:

      When I was selecting books for my library, I always read the negative reviews for a book. Negative reviews point out the flaws. This helped me in making decisions if it was a good selection for my students and teachers. However most books purchased had the most positive reviews, unless it was something my student would eat up regardless of quality, like Goosebumps.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.