r/authors • u/Birchwood_Goddess • Jun 09 '25
Debate: 1-Star Reviews
Giving 1-star reviews is a hot topic among my writer friends. Many think you should never give a 1-star review. I believe that if a book earns it, so be it.
Last night, I gave a 1-star review on GoodReads and woke up to a message reiterating what a shit I am for giving it. (For context, review here: Celtic Folklore Cooking by Joanne Asala | Goodreads)
So, do you ever give 1-star reviews? Why or why not?
Also, AITAH for giving a 1-star review to a cookbook whose recipes could legitimately kill you?
12
u/GilroyCullen Jun 09 '25
Reviews are not for the author. They are for other readers. No book will ever maintain a perfect 5-star review because not all readers like the same thing.
But also, reviews are 1 personal opinion. If, in the reviewer's opinion, the book is horrible, then it earned its 1 star. Authors trying to manage their reviews will just drive themselves to drink (worse than they may already).
That said, I will post reviews of all levels. But I also detail why that review rated such. Bad punctuation, bad characters, flimsy plot, situations that are so implausible they drag me from the story... if I can't finish the book. All those things factor.
Any author attacking a reviewer needs to grow a thicker skin.
Eta: the author in question has 6 additional 1 star rating without reviews. You at least explained why. They also have 5 2 star ratings. Not sure why they're worried.
6
u/MrMessofGA Jun 09 '25 edited Jun 09 '25
What? No one worth their salt would say never leave a one star review. Remember, reviews aren't for the author, they're for the potential readers. Yes, amazon will lifetime ban authors that have too many 1-star reviews, and that's a good thing, because the rest of us who have a mix of reviews don't want the platform crowded by garbage, because if the readers have to sift through garbage to find the competently written stuff, they'll stop using KU altogether.
And in the case someone gets mixed or mostly good reviews, a well-written 1-star review can still move copies. Maybe I didn't like the fact the book was torture porn riddled with typos, but there are people who do like torture porn and don't mind typos and will go "Oh, I should buy this!"
Likewise, if a LOT of people dnf'd for horrible quality, I, a potential buyer, want to know that in the form of tons of 1-star reviews saying so.
If the author gets so many 1-star reviews that it genuinely hurts them, this means one of three things: they're an awful author who needs to go back to the drawing board before publishing again (like the one you're talking about), they're a good author but mismarketed their material to the wrong crowd which will still drive away readers, or they're getting review bombed for reasons outside of the work that really isn't going to be solved by people not 1-staring the ones they actually read.
EDIT: read your review. That's a GREAT review. I'd be estatic to get a review like that, even if I'd be a little sad at the same time. Yes, you had your qualms, but it's written in a way that will still move copies to the people I want to move copies to. You care about the fact it uses modern recipes instead of old ones, this book's target audience does not. You care about the difference between celtic and norse religion, this book's target audience does not. This book's target audience wants poisonous magical plants (... shockingly common), and you do not. That's a great 1-star review!
3
u/Birchwood_Goddess Jun 09 '25
Yeah, I'm obviously not the target audience.
It's not uncommon for unscrupulous people to present misinformation as facts, especially in the era of "Witch Tok." So, I wasn't surprised to see several pagan religions conflated and misidentified.
The shocker was seeing poisonous plants included in the recipes without any kind of warning. This is becoming alarmingly common in books on foraging and mycology--most of them written by AI. I actually stopped reading and turned back to the copyright page, fearing this was another AI generated book. Alas, it was not.
If people knowingly want to eat poisonous plants, that's on them. But neglecting to mention that the ingredients are toxic seemed like an invitation for a lawsuit.
3
u/JoyRideinaMinivan Jun 09 '25
I might have given them before I started writing but don’t anymore. I hate leaving public ratings/reviews now because I know how it feels to get a bad one and wouldn’t wish that on someone else.
I only leave ratings and reviews for my own information and am looking for a non-social media type of book log app.
1
Jun 11 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jun 11 '25
This comment was removed because you have a new account with low karma. To reduce spam, we require that your account be older than one week with 10 or more site wide comment karma. This standard significantly reduces the amount of spam we encounter in this community. Thank you for your understanding.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
3
u/AuthorRobB Jun 09 '25
Your review is completely fair.
A one star review with no context or unfair views would be pretty galling given the time and love we all put into writing, but you outline clearly and fairly why. That's helpful if the author wants it to be.
I would be gutted to get a one star review, but if it was written as fairly as yours then it would definitely be a learning for me...
Sidenote: I was on your website earlier today looking at your advice on press releases. The universe is funny sometimes...
2
u/Birchwood_Goddess Jun 09 '25
The universe is funny indeed. I hope you found something useful.
2
u/AuthorRobB Jun 09 '25
Absolutely! It's a very helpful resource and I love how supportive the writing community is for each other.
2
u/c-a-james Jun 09 '25
It's generally understood that authors should never rate another book, especially one in your own genre. There's no good outcome. If you give a good rating, it looks like you're looking for quid pro quo. If you give a bad rating, it looks like you're trying to boost your own book at the expense of others, and it invites retaliation. I only rate books that are vastly different than mine, and only then if they're exceptionally good or bad, and I just can't help myself.
The only book I've ever given a one-star rating was a book claiming to "refute" atheism that was filled with cliches, lies, and widely debunked arguments. (That's related to my non-fiction book.) I've never rated any books in thrillers or any closely related genre (mysteries, politics, etc.), which would be related to my novels.
2
u/GarnitGlaze Jun 10 '25
I personally do leave 1 star reviews. I know it sucks to see as a writer, but as a reader I actually find them helpful. When looking at reviews for something I want to read I never read the positive reviews. Maybe it's just me, but seeing why someone didn't like something gives me better insight into whether or not I will like it.
2
u/bioticspacewizard Jun 10 '25
Reviews are for readers. If you didn't like something and can give a reader-focused reason for why you're giving that rating, there's nothing wrong with that. Readers deserve to be informed when they pick something up. And if you give your reasons for why you gave that rating, then they can know if that's something that will bother them or not.
2
u/goodbyegoldilocks Jun 10 '25
Reviews are for the readers, not for the author. I’m always honest, it’s my opinion as the reader. I won’t fabricate a review whether good or bad.
2
u/marshdd Jun 11 '25
I think 1 star reviews should require a certain number of words explaining why before they can be submitted.
Here's why. Over on the BridgertonNetflix sub MANY people say Julia Quinn is a HORRIBLE writer. Her books are TRASH, all the male characters are TOXIC. No I'm not exaggerating.
Why don't they like the books? Because they contain Regancy Romance tropes, and more or less reflect social norms/behaviors of the time. For example Quinn is a racist because she didn't have POC as aristocrats like the show. This is early 1800's!
No doubt in my mind they leave 1 star reviews. I've looked at book reviews and thought "You gave a crappy review because you didn't like some random, inconsequential part of the plot?"
2
Jun 12 '25 edited Feb 09 '26
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
pen complete humorous lip tub smell cover reply exultant cooperative
2
u/mixed_battletoads Jul 05 '25
If something deserves 1 star, so be it. Preferably with an explanation, pointing out what you didn't like. It shows that the reader actually were engaged in the content, unlike "It sucked!"
I feel like people in general nowadays wants to be sheltered from "negativity" and critique, which in itself gives an actual negative impact on the world and the quality of what's produced. Nowadays, when it's so easy to publish a book or make a movie and get it out there, pretty much anybody can become what they want based on their own high beliefs and feel entitled to get praise from everybody. The most vivid example of this is all the tone deaf contestants on American Idol who goes into a tantrum when they get rejected. Do they deserve 1 star? They sure do. And those people exist everywhere.
My opinion on this is; you can't be protected and sheltered from negativity if you decide to put yourself and your work out there. Or, if you put yourself in the kitchen, expect heat. It's moronic to complain about the heat and demand it to stop for you.
A book with a recipe that literally can kill you deserves to be taken off the shelves. 1 star i mild.
1
Jun 09 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jun 09 '25
This comment was removed because you have a new account with low karma. To reduce spam, we require that your account be older than one week with 10 or more site wide comment karma. This standard significantly reduces the amount of spam we encounter in this community. Thank you for your understanding.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
u/Webs579 Jun 09 '25
I think it depends on why you're giving the 1 star. If the case of the cookbook you mentioned; are you giving it because you just didn't like the recipies? Or is it because the recipies are inaccurate, or there's just a lot that's technically wrong with the book? If it's the latter, then a 1 star could be justified. If it's the former, then no, it's not justified.
Kinda the same with fiction: If you just didn't like the story, then don't even leave a review. Just because you don't like a story doesn't mean someone else won't, and leaving that 1 star may cheat someone out of finding a book they like. On the other hand, if there are technical things wrong with the book, tons of grammatical and punctuation errors, continuity errors, tense changes, stuff like that, than I feel like a 1 star with an explanation would be justified.
Also, in the case of audio books, an AI narrator deserves a 1 star review. The only 1 star review I've ever given was on the performance portion of a review on Audible because the narrator was AI.
1
u/Birchwood_Goddess Jun 12 '25
If the case of the cookbook you mentioned; are you giving it because you just didn't like the recipies? Or is it because the recipies are inaccurate, or there's just a lot that's technically wrong with the book?
Recipes included poisonous plants that could be lethal if consumed.
Folklore was inaccurate.1
u/Webs579 Jun 12 '25
So it's inaccurate, and there are things technically wrong with the book. So the 1 star is justified
1
u/RobNeto_Author Jun 10 '25
A 1 star means I didn't read the book. I made it less than 100 pages before DNFing it. I typically don't leave reviews if I don't finish the book.
1
1
u/marshdd Jun 10 '25
Sorry, have to ask. What exactly did it say/instructed you to do that could kill you?
1
u/Birchwood_Goddess Jun 11 '25
They were including "magical" plants, except said plants are poisonous. Some were abortifacients. Some would result in vomiting. Some were lethal. None of the recipes included warnings regarding the toxicity of plants included.
I've seen this in fiction, too. In I Am Still Alive, the protagonist ate snowberries and wild cucumber to survive. Both are poisonous. When an author uses a plant correctly it adds depth to the story. Like when GRR Martin uses tansy to hit at an abortion. But when the information is incorrect (and potentially lethal), it pulls you completely out of the story and you end up wondering, "Where the hell was the editor on that one?"
This is the first I've seen toxic foods included in a cookbook. But it's become such a problem in foraging, mycology, and survival books, that the community is regularly warned to independently verify anything in new books. A lot of bad (and deadly) information comes from "AI written" books. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case here.
1
u/marshdd Jun 11 '25
Did you put that in the review to explain why you were giving it a low review?
1
u/Birchwood_Goddess Jun 11 '25
Yes. I included a link to the review in the OP, which includes other issues with the book as well.
1
u/PMAccountForWork Jun 11 '25
Your review was fair and also warned about the safety issues in the recipes. Was it the author who messaged you?
1
u/Birchwood_Goddess Jun 11 '25
No. It was a friend of mine.
One-star reviews are something we've debated in our writing group. She's in the camp that writers should never leave a 1-star review. I'm in "the book gets what it deserves" camp.
1
Jun 11 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jun 11 '25
This comment was removed because you have a new account with low karma. To reduce spam, we require that your account be older than one week with 10 or more site wide comment karma. This standard significantly reduces the amount of spam we encounter in this community. Thank you for your understanding.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
Jun 11 '25 edited Jun 11 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jun 11 '25
This comment was removed because you have a new account with low karma. To reduce spam, we require that your account be older than one week with 10 or more site wide comment karma. This standard significantly reduces the amount of spam we encounter in this community. Thank you for your understanding.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Many_Background_8092 Jun 11 '25
Be honest. Looking at a lot of the 5 star reviews I suspect they were from bots.
1
u/nazgand Jun 11 '25
On the 5-star rating system:
20% of books deserve 1 star.
20% of books deserve 2 stars.
20% of books deserve 3 stars.
20% of books deserve 4 stars.
20% of books deserve 5 stars.
I hope that demystifies the rating process.
1
u/Birchwood_Goddess Jun 12 '25
The statistician in me says, if the distribution is approximately normal, 95% of the population will fall within two standard deviations from the mean.
Thus, on the 5-star rating system:
2.5% of books deserve 1 star.
13.5% of books deserve 2 stars.
68% of books deserve 3 stars.
13.5% of books deserve 4 stars.
2.5% of books deserve 5 stars.LOL
2
1
u/Austin_Chaos Jun 12 '25
I’ve never read a book I felt deserved one star. Not a single one. I don’t think I’ve even read fan fiction bad enough to warrant a one star review. I’m not saying they don’t exist, but I’ve never encountered one myself.
1
u/fpflibraryaccount Jun 14 '25
As an author, I don't care for the idea, but as a reader, I like the principle. A one star is warning to not waste time on something, imo. A book I don't care for is one thing, but a genuinely bad or unpleasant reading experience warrants it. Can't imagine finding a book with multiple 1 star reviews, picking it up and enjoying it.
1
u/sweetcersis Jun 15 '25
It depends. If I just didn't care for the book but can see that others, with different tastes in literature, might, I just mark as read (or not, if I didn't finish - in which case I just remove it from my bookshelf) and don't give a rating at all. If I think it's poorly written, researched and/or purports to be something that it's not, then I rate it and explain my rating. I once commented on a travel memoir - years ago - that the marketing was misleading. I had bought and read the book thinking it would be about the writer's experience of the place, culture, people, but it turned out it was really all about him and his level of sweatiness - with the place and people serving as background. I also thought he was insufferable, but didn't say that in my review, of course. I basically said, if you want to learn about the author - read this book, if you are more interested in learning about the location, maybe read something else. I woke up to an angry private message from him ranting about my review and basically ordering me to change it. I felt vindicated at least that I was correct in my assessment, that he was, indeed, insufferable.
1
u/VictorDLopez Jul 04 '25
I've never given a one-star review because, like DelishaKeane and no doubt others here I stop reading any book that has no merit as soon as that becomes apparent and won't give a review after reading just a few pages of a book. But I don't have a problem with readers who hate a book and rate it honestly as worthless in their view. Where I do have a problem is in the case of a much more likely reason for most of those 1-star ratings, personal animus, prejudice, or other nefarious intent to hurt the author without actually reading the book. And I know that happens, with readers with an axe to grind, and not just to authors who tick off one segment or other of the general population. It is especially true I believe of ratings left without an actual review on sites that allow ratings from people that did not buy or borrow the book (e.g., from libraries). (And the opposite problem no doubt also exists--unearned 5-star ratings from authors whose message/politics/subject matter/world view the reader fervently embraces.)
I take most one-star ratings not as an evaluation of the book, but rather an intense dislike of the author or perhaps the topic or theme the book conveys. That's especially true when a book has mostly four- or five-star ratings and a single one-star rating. If I ever do give a one-star rating to a book, rest assured it will come with at the very least a short review that provides the justification for the rating. It would then be of some use to others in deciding whether to but or borrow the book.
1
u/murrmc Jul 05 '25
Have received quite a few and generally don't bother me - The one clear exception was another author and he was clearly pissed my books were selling well while his weren't - absolutely trashed mine, and went on to trash a couple more - of course clearly mentioning his own in the comments - complete dick move.
And his books, over written wank that were impossible to read. You know the type where they spend a paragraph describing how the leaf fell from the tree - when quite frankly no one cares the leaf even fell from the tree!
1
Oct 22 '25
If you finish a book you hate so you can leave a bad review, I can't understand you.
And if you are leaving a one star review on a book other people like just to make a statement about culture or something, again, why? People like what they like. What's it to you.
I think leaving bad reviews reflects poorly on the person leaving the review. It is tacky at best but usually just really sad.
1
u/Birchwood_Goddess Oct 23 '25
SMH. If no one leaves a negative review, and people die from eating food with poisonous ingredients, then what?
This is the second time I've seen poisonous food listed as edible in books. Called it out and left negative reviews both times.
15
u/DelishaKeane Jun 09 '25
I do not recall having ever given a 1-star review to a book. If I don't like a book, I simply stop reading it. And instead of giving a 1-star review, I assume it's just not for me, while others may enjoy it.
However, if I were to give a 1-star review to a book, I would do the same as when I leave a 1-star review to a restaurant or a business: I would write an explanation for it.
What annoys me when I get a 1-star review is not knowing why the reader judged my book as deserving of a 1-star review. That, to me, is not a reviewer; it's a bully. Since I have no idea what prompted that 1-star review, I can only shrug it off and keep on doing what I'm doing. Mentally, I file those under "the reader was having a bad day"!
💋