The Dreaded Three Stars

My mate Kris is doing a series at the moment about book gradings which has been making me think a little both about how people grade in general and also how I grade.  Mostly though it's made me think about the three star grade and different people's perceptions of that.  Here's a couple of perceptions in a nutshell:

Readers: Three stars isn't bad
Authors: Three stars for one of my books is bad

There's also the idea that if you are a reviewer then your average rating should be three stars. If you are under three stars, then you are a harsh reviewer; if you're over three stars then you're too lenient.  At the end of the year several reviewers proudly displayed their stats telling their readers that they were an average three star reviewer.  Firm but fair.  Apparently.

My average rating for reviews is 4.04 stars, so think what you like about that.

What I think about it is that, on the whole, I read books I think am going to like. Sometimes I'm disappointed, but most times I get what I'm hoping for. If I really like a book I give it four stars, so it stands to reason that many of my books will have four star ratings.  I still get this vague feeling of guilt though when I'm giving out lots of four stars, sort of like I'm letting the reviewing side down by liking the books.

Back to the topic at hand which is the thee star rating, or 'Good' if you look at the way I rate at this blog.  Different people have different ideas about what constitutes a three star rating.  Good Reads criteria is 'I liked it', which if you think about it is actually a decent description for a book. I think many authors should be pleased to know that their book was liked.  My 'Good' rating is slightly different to that and follows two separate ideas:

1. That the book may be a little bland
I read so many m/m books that there are some that fade into almost obscurity within a day of me finishing the book.  That doesn't mean to say that I didn't enjoy the book whilst reading. I probably did and found it very diverting or entertaining at the time. 'Good' books are those whose plot I can't remember or character names are forgotten, all within a relatively short time frame.  I once had a book that I needed to review. I read it before realising that the ARC had been given out weeks in advance so I held off reviewing until nearer the publication date.  When I came to write the review I couldn't remember anything about it. Not one thing.  I ended up re-reading the entire book before I could review which wasn't a huge chore because the story was fairly entertaining.  That is the perfect example of a grade three/Good book in my view.

2. That the book may have features or weaknesses which annoy me
These sort of books fall into two areas:

a) Annoying characters or plot devises like the Big Misunderstanding
b) Several annoying typos or errors or a written style that just does not appeal to me

Both areas will often lead to me being pulled out of the story on several occasions either to puzzle over a continuity error or to shout at a character/situation which irritates me.  It interrupts the flow of the reading, pings my 'not like' button, or leaves me feeling frustrated, but not enough that I want to stop reading.  There are some authors who will always get a 'Good' grade from me because I don't connect well with the way they write. That isn't the fault of the author, just that we're not compatible and I soon learn not to read books by that author any more.  Then again I may have an author who I love to read, but something about one of their books really gets on my nerves - maybe the actions of a character, or something in the plotting. I won't give up on an author for that, but it will mean I might rate them lower than I have previously.

As a reader, I don't think that a three star/Good review is a bad thing.  I've bought books on the strength of a three star review, and I've had readers tell me they have bought books based on one of my 'Good' reviews. After all, what hasn't worked for me may work for another reader.  The important thing, I think is that there IS a review, even one line, to say why the grade is given because that allows readers to make an informed choice.

So, my fellow readers, what is your opinion on the three star/Good review? If you see three stars does it put you off buying a book? Do you think three stars is a 'bad' review?  What are your criteria for giving out three stars? Do tell.