The Chrysanthemum Connection: What Do Food and Reviews Have in Common?

What Do Food and Reviews Have in Common?

We don't need anything spoiled.
We won't eat anything that is spoiled.
Why would we buy and show a record where the mystery inside has already been spoilt by a review?

Reviewers - spoilers are to be avoided at all costs.

I've said it before (HERE) and it needs saying again.

A spoiler is a published part of data that divulges a surprise, such as a plot device in a book. Sometimes it's still a bit of story telling a lecturer in greater detail what goes on in the story - something a reader should have learned BY interpretation the scripture itself, not in a review.

That being said. I'd care to exemplify my head by directing your care to two reviews. Yes, one of them is mine, but the showtime one really got my aid and inspired this post.

Link #1 for The Witch and The Wolf

Have you take it? Good. Here's the thing. The site provided the blurb.
That's good. It's what came later that had my eyebrows raising into my hairline. The blurb hints at what Lillian is working from. HINTS! Obviously, the author expects a subscriber to buy the book and get out the particular details.

Notice how the review reveals all the components - the who of it and the why of it. I don't hold with that at all.

I'm not going to picking on the few typographical errors - that happens.
It's the spoilers that were revealed that really annoyed me. Even the final sentence mentions a negative when a review should end on a positive tone.

Here's Link #2 for The Witch and The Wolf.

Please compare the two. Does the second give enough to lure a reader without falling into Spoilers? Do you see any retelling of the account leaving a reader with no surprises? Do you see more about how the book affected me and my thoughts versus telling a reader about the story itself?

A survey is not telling or re-telling about what you learn in the book. It's about sharing what you discovered and how it made you feel - what worked for you, what you liked or didn't and what were the author's strong or weak points in her/his writing.

Whereas the first review was verbose in the revealing - I only inferred:

The international conflict explodes onto the view in a stir of ostentation and effective annoyance. By that I think the writer did a big job in giving me the willies. I really didn`t like those disgusting villainous and highly inappropriate men and Ms. Schneider did a large job of insuring my distaste.I've had my say. I've given you two reviews of the same book. Now I'd like to live your opinion. As a reader and/or reviewer, which is more professional and/or respectful? Which is more of a line? What are the light points that you see in either review? What do you think the strong points?

It doesn't matter that the moment one is mine. I'm not pure but I certainly can reach for that goal. If you are reading this, then I'm guessing you lack the like as me, to spell well written reviews.

And please, no spoilers. They are as bad as an all synopsis review.