I know review rating systems are supposed to be something easily grasped like 1-5 stars (or 1-5 little icons of books or ink stained author’s fingers if you prefer), but trying to figure out what to say about a manuscript with both 1 and, well, maybe 3.5 star elements got me thinking about how useful those really are. Yeah, you could use a series of star ratings for the different elements of each book, but that starts to get tedious and I'm not sure how meaningful it really is. I firmly believe that most good writers of fiction stand out more as a writer or as a storyteller and are not equally good at both (that's not intended as a put down, nor is it saying that they're not good at the other... just not equally so). But I also believe that tends to color how the other elements of their writing work, which makes it unfair to rate them separately. Anyway, here’s a different sort of personal rating system, from high to low. Got anything similar of your own?
Lose yourself in them books. The sort that you swim up out of, blinking at a world that’s suddenly very different from the one you were just inhabiting, and sort of surprised to realize that the change came from closing the covers of a book rather than physical travel. You aren’t the same “you” while reading. You’re a part of the story, whether as an observer who is part the real world you and part the sort of person who inhabits that story, or through taking on the persona of one of the actual characters and seeing things through their eyes and mind and soul—as created by the author—not just your own. A part of that “story you” will remain with you long after the covers are closed, and possibly even after you've forgotten most of the story details.
Magic Kingdom books. There’s magic in the vivid way the story and characters and setting come to life before your eyes but it’s more like a trip to a vacation site than finding a new place to live. You revel in the sights and sounds, but you don't lose touch with your real world self or the knowledge that this is entertainment presented to you, and not a new world you're truly inhabiting. Magic, sparkling entertainment, but with a barrier between you all the same.
Bread and butter reads. Another phrase that probably sounds like a bit of a put down but really isn’t meant that way, because these are what keep this picky readaholic going. There’s a limited quantity of best of the best available to begin with, I have a major reading habit to feed, and honestly, a steady diet of rock my world books can be as tiring as a steady diet of reading as a penance books. A lot of times I just want to relax into the reading equivalent of a comfortable pair of jeans. But they have to be good ones I like and that fit. Bread and butter reads may not be absolute magic, but I said picky readaholic for a reason—they still have to meet certain standards. Writing standards which only begin at the high end of competent (and I'd better really like something else about the book to settle for competent), while the story has to have enough substance and hold together well enough to keep my interest and make it easy to suspend my sense of disbelief.
This is where I put the bulk of my reading, most of which goes beyond the minimal standards. They're well written, quality stories, with characters I can believe in, within the story if not as real people, and whom I care about. That last—care about—is a big factor. I have real issues getting through books that lack at least one character I care about and can somehow connect to, no matter how finely plotted the story or how elegantly crafted the prose. Writing is probably the biggest factor in deciding which category a book fits in, but my personal reading preferences for this category start with the need for that character who engages me, with writing, then plot coming after. I’ll live with a relatively weak plot if I’m enjoying the telling of it and the people involved in it enough.
Convenience store brand white bread and tasteless, lite whipped (i.e. air and water filled) spread. They aren’t entirely dissimilar to the bread and butter reads, but there just isn’t enough there there. These are the books with the too thin plots and the insipid characters and basic beige settings, with writing that ranges from a mild but firm “don’t give up your day job, son” to the corporate memo level of stultifying mediocrity. The writing here isn't actively horrible, just boring or overly derivative or amateurish (whether or not the writer is actually amateur). Things such as laundry list action sequences, let no word go unmodified syndrome, plodding syntax, never using a normal one syllable word when a more "impressive" polysyllabic one will do, or having enough basic grammar and typo errors that they become an active distraction. These are the books that aren't interesting enough to make you want to read and not well written enough to keep you reading regardless. The saddest are the ones I'm not even interested enough to cheat and check the end, just to see how they come out.
The pits. Need I say more?
