Thoughts on Book Reviewing, and New Rating System

Recently, I’ve been thinking a bit about the blogging that I do here at MsBookish. I enjoy the book blog world very much, and have met some wonderful book bloggers in the short time I’ve been blogging here.

But I’ve been asking myself: what is it that I want to do here? And okay, I’ll admit that the main impetus for this bit of blogging introspection (gazing at my blogging navel?) was my latest result for MsBookish.com at Typealzyer, where I was informed that when writing as Ms. Bookish, I’m an ISTP (The Mechanic):

The independent and problem-solving type. They are especially attuned to the demands of the moment are masters of responding to challenges that arise spontaneously. They generally prefer to think things out for themselves and often avoid inter-personal conflicts.

The Mechanics enjoy working together with other independent and highly skilled people and often like seek fun and action both in their work and personal life. They enjoy adventure and risk such as in driving race cars or working as policemen and firefighters.

I definitely am very independent, and have a real tendency to problem-solve everything. While I like the independent part of the description (not to mention the fun, action and adventure bits – but let’s forget about the risk, shall we?), I’ve actually been trying to work on this whole problem solving tendency of mine. There’s something fatiguing about always responding to things by presenting a solution of some sort.

So I’ve been wondering exactly how I’ve been writing my posts here – and why. I most certainly wasn’t aiming for a problem-solving feel in my reviews. Independent, yes. Fun, action, adventure – absolutely! But problem solving?

Hmmm.

In my “real life” (aka my personal blog), I apparently write from the perspective of an ISFP (The Artist). I must reach for a different blogging hat when I blog here, and I’m wondering if that’s quite the way I want things.

My style here at MsBookish has obviously changed from the first few months I’ve been blogging here – back then, I was an ESFP (The Performers). My food blog still gets this rating. 

(It kind of boggles the mind, doesn’t it, that the same person – me! – can write in three different styles on three different blogs … )

So I’ve been mulling over this just a bit, thinking about what I’m trying to accomplish here. What I do know for sure – I’m here to rev up my reading, and to have fun.

(And navel gazing is, at times, fun. Right?)

And Now, a Revamped Rating System

Well, enough of that blogging navel! I’ve also been thinking about something else.

I’ve finished quite a few books this month that are sitting here, patiently waiting for me to review them.

(Who would have known that a book can look at you in such a silently accusing manner?)

But for some reason, I’ve been reluctant to do so, and it’s taken me a few days to figure out why:

I didn’t like the letter-grade rating system I was using.

I realized that I just don’t like assigning a letter grade to a book I’ve read. I don’t naturally think about books from a critical perspective. I’m the type of reader who finishes a book with thoughts like “wow” or “well, that was rather boring”, and while both of these “rankings” are easy enough to translate into a letter grade, it’s all the ones in between that are problematic.

So I’ve revamped my rating system, and hopefully I won’t feel as reluctant to write up my reviews anymore. The new ratings are:

Extraordinary.

Wonderful.

Good Read Plus.

Good Read.

It’s Okay.

Not To My Taste.

DNF (did not finish).

Since words and phrases have different connotations for different people, I’ve explained more fully on my ratings systems page what I mean by each of these ratings.

Now to see if this helps me tackle my to-be-reviewed pile!

Tweet

Related posts:

1. Saturday Thoughts

Tagged as: book thoughts