Why Ratings Give Me a Headache (Sometimes)

Hello my stellar beauties! (OK, where did that come from? O_O).

(From the equation stars = rating, probably. I guess my subconscious was trying to tell me something...).

OK, here's my confession for today: a couple of days ago, I went and changed a handful of my old ratings. Nothing major, just half a star more here, half a star less there. But the thing is, I felt that I needed to do it, or my present and future ratings would be taunted. Here's the whole story...

It all started with a couple of books I requested from their very authors in 2014. You know, directly approaching an author is very different from dealing with their press or agent. If they like your personality and/or your blog (and those two apparently did), AND they decide that you and/or your blog are a good fit for their story, it gets personal. Also, YOU were the one who reached out to them - not the other way around. YOU were the one who was acting all excited about their story, on the strength of the blurb alone. Of course, this is no guarantee that you'll fall in love with their book, and I suppose they know it. But still. So the books came, and I didn't fall in love with them. And, like I already stated in another post, I felt like a thief. Also, one of them was even part of a BLOG TOUR, for goodness' sake. Could I have opted out? No, because the author knew me personally by then, and had actually helped me get into it by pointing it out to me. So I soldiered on and coughed the additional half star out for both.

It has plagued me since then.

Until Thursday.

So, I was about to write a couple of reviews for books that I had either requested from the publisher (a very understanding one), or won in a giveaway. I wasn't under the pressure of giving them the additional half star this time. But I kept going to those old ratings of mine and thinking "if I rated [old book] X stars, I can't rate [new book] less or the same, because I actually liked [new book] better. But not as much as I liked [other book], so I can't give [new book] the same rating I gave [other book] either". Believe me, it was nagging at me too much for my own sake. Also, I had long ago realised that there was at least one book that I SHOULD have given the additional half star instead, because it was FAR BETTER than some stuff I would read and review later, only I didn't know it at the time. So, I decided there was only one way out of it - going back and changing a handful of my old 3 and 3.5 ratings (upping one of them and downing the others by half a star).

And now I feel...unburdened.

You see, this rating thing is crazy. There are people for whom 3 stars mean "meh" or even "I SO could have done without this book, thank you". There are people who never give a book 5 stars unless it rains upside down (I've met a couple on Goodreads), so their 4 mean "great read" and their 3 "very good read". And there are people who never rate books on their blog, and other people who never rate books on Goodreads either.

Not to mention the whole half-star headache.

Like for other people (maybe a lot of other people), my ratings are part brain, part guts. Especially with 5 star ratings, it's not about the book's perfection - yes, I take the style and pacing and originality and whatnot into consideration, and they do constitute a huge part of my rating, but in the end, 5 stars are for the stories (and characters...though not necessarily) that speak to me the most. They may not be perfect, but they stick to my mind as much as to my heart. On the other hand, there may be books that have no obvious faults, but that I feel less engrossed in. This is why I struggle with ratings. Some people see a 3 or 3.5 and think "oh, why should I bother with this one when there are so many 5 star books around". The fact is, even if Goodreads (and the like) didn't have a rating option, I probably couldn't help giving stars to the books I read. But on the other hand, I don't think they speak that much on behalf of a book. Yes, I admit starting on the reviews with the lowest ratings when I'm considering buying a book, because it's the fastest way to catch wind of anything I might not like. And it sometimes happens that a bunch of reviewers mention this or that thing that didn't work for them, while they are the very things that get me hooked on a story. But in the end...I pay much more attention to the actual reviews than to the ratings.

I have a daily habit of peeking into the Community > People > Recent Reviews > Recent Reviews of My Books section on Goodreads, seeking for new opinions about the books on my TBR list (OK, there are ALSO reviews of your read books in there, and you can't turn them off - but we know Goodreads is far from perfect. On the other hand, I sometimes meet people over our same book choice, plus it's fun to know what other people think of the books you've read anyway). I read an awful lot of reviews. So, the rating...is more like a bonus thing in a way. For me at least. But a bonus thing I have to do the right way, because I'm punctilious. (I think I first used the word "punctilious" in this post, and since Erin Callahan seemed to like my choice of words so much, I can't think of a better one to describe my pickiness right now ;D). And nevertheless, whenever I rate a book 3 or 3.5 stars, I feel bad because I know some people will think "OK, I can skip this one then". (On a side note, I don't think my reviews have all that power - but maybe someone who has never heard about a certain book before won't be motivated to look it up after my review). And it's not what I meant. I just meant it didn't wowed me, or it had a few issues, but it also had a few merits, and you might even like it more than me, and anyway I don't REGRET reading it.

So...I was wondering...how do you rate your books? do you rate books 5 stars even if they're not perfect because they speak to your soul? are 3 - 3.5 stars too few for you to pick a book? and...DO YOU FUSS OVER RATINGS AT ALL?