Today’s post is more of a discussion. I keep a reading journal, and write short reviews of everything which I read, and which I then copy onto my Goodreads account. Some of these reviews only end up being a few sentences long; others are far more comprehensive, and are cross-posted here.
I was wondering the following of my fellow bloggers: how you decide what to review and feature on your blog? Do you write comprehensive reviews for every book which you read, or do you have an agenda in mind when picking up certain books? Are there any books which you’ve looked forward to reviewing, but which have fallen short in some way? Do you also use Goodreads as a reviewing tool?
I have been keeping lists of books which I want to read since the age of fifteen. Every time I saw a wonderful-looking tome in a bookshop, on my library’s catalogue, or whilst scrolling through Goodreads, blogs, and literary articles, I made a note of it. Six filled notebooks later, I have decided that 2017 will be the year of searching out and reading books already on my TBR list. Things are getting a little out of control already, and if I continue to add to my list, I can see myself never getting through it!
This isn’t to say that I won’t be adding the odd tome here and there when it comes highly recommended, or when I read a particularly persuasive or intriguing review. I just want to cut back almost entirely, and stop writing down hundreds of books every month (perhaps a slight exaggeration, but at least that’s what it feels like I’ve been doing!).
I will be choosing every book from my list at random, but have decided to give it a little structure by starting with my earliest notebook, and going ahead almost chronologically. I won’t be making a note of which books I have read from which notebook other than on my yearly challenge, but hopefully this way forward will work well, and will make me feel as though all of my reading is manageable.
How many books make up your TBR list? How do you keep track of it? Do you actively search for books from it, or are you like me, preferring to write new tomes down as soon as you find them?
I have been thinking a lot of late as to whether I can still call myself a book reviewer. I talk about books a lot, whether in daily life or on BookTube, but I rarely have the time nowadays to sit down with a book and write a comprehensive review of it as I once used to.
I wrote frequently for the blog, and for a couple of other bookish websites (including Goodreads) up until last year, but since starting my Master’s, I haven’t really had the time to. This means that I am receiving very few books from publishers; the last book which plopped through my letterbox was received a couple of months before Christmas last year, and 2016 has been a book-drought in this respect.
Whilst I still love crafting book reviews – when I have the time to write them! – I have noticed that my blogging habits are veering in different directions of late. I have spent an entire month focusing upon a Neglected Women Writers series, and find myself writing smaller, less far-reaching reviews of books which I have very much enjoyed and want to bring to the attention of others, rather than the longer efforts which I used to make.
I would like this post of meandering thoughts to lead to a discussion of sorts. Can I still consider myself a book reviewer, or am I a book blogger? Is there a distinction between the two for you? Do you think reviews of books need to be comprehensive and far-reaching, such as you would read in The Times Literary Supplement, for instance, or is it okay to write your thoughts about a certain text in a less extensive way? Do you prefer book blogs which solely focus upon reviews, or do you like a mixed literary foundation, as you can find here?