In catching up with my news feeds and other posts that I have missed over the past few weeks I found two that have some synergy. The first is a post about how much science fiction is created and published each year.

SFF is Too Big?

There are so many stories published at this point that no fan, no matter how quickly they read,  can keep up with what’s out there. There are hundreds and hundreds of stories that come out regularly. I particularly enjoyed the math portion of the article that showed a certain rarity of story from decades ago. It seemed that it could have been my faulty memories from when I was young that the stories I enjoyed so much were so desperately hard to find. As it turns out, the numbers show it actually was hard to find those stories, as fewer of them were published each year compared to today’s standard.

This is certainly not a post, or commentary about how things were better back in the day. I don’t believe that. Things may have been more clear, or more clearly defined with less overlap,  however, it didn’t mean that things were better by definition. I enjoy the simple fact that I have a huge number of choices when I’m looking for a new thing to read. I say “thing” simply because it might be a novel, it might be an anthology, or a series of blog posts, or an online published story or a graphic novel… you get the idea. There are SO many choices out there. I love it.

The second post is Just Plain Good.

The post praises things simply being ‘good’, and enjoys recommendations that match that qualification. Quality and popularity are not always meshed together, in either direction. There is a modern standard that they discuss where reviews and commentary need to be hyperbolic in order to get attention. I agree with the author of this post that there is a need to be circumspect in our word choice.

I have been posting my book reviews for many years. I always try to show why I felt the way I did about any given work. I have some small understanding of how difficult it is to get any work published, so I always hope that an author reading my review understands that my review is precisely that, mine. My opinion and nothing more. I also attempt to avoid hyperbole. I have a special and specific shelf of books in my house that hold the books that have truly changed me or impacted my thought process so much that I return to them again and again. It’s a single shelf and that’s it. There are so few it’s easy to keep them in one place. I’ve written essays in the past about what sort of works changed me. I don’t want to be extra dramatic or willfully polarizing. I hope the clear and simple choices I make in reviewer terms will help people who read my reviews to understand how that affects their choice.

That all seemed a little convoluted as it fell out of my head. Let me see if I can explain this more clearly. If you read my review of a book, then you go read that book and you agree with me, you could then trust that my next review might better match for you.If you read my review of a book, then you go read that book and you think, “my God that was terrible! How did he praise that? I hated it all”, then you could understand the next time you read one of my reviews that if I loved it you won’t. I often find that an ‘opposite’ reviewer is just as helpful as one I match well with. That is the idea behind being as authentic as possible. If you find a match, then you will look to that person or those reviewers, whoever they may be, as a trusted source for finding the next thing you want to read. The screaming noise makers just don’t fit that category.

That is where the synergy comes in with the article about science fiction publishing becoming too big. Finding a reviewer or a series of reviewers you can trust to give you honest and clear opinions on things, without exaggeration, will help you sift through the hundreds and hundreds of choices and perhaps even guide you to finding works that you would never have otherwise found. I suppose it’s very similar to panning for gold. You spend a great deal of time trying to wash away the grit and find the shiny treasure that you can then show to others. 

Revel in the multitude of choices that you have when looking for your next entertaining read.  Look for, or perhaps even become, a trusted source for your circle of friends. It takes time to learn and see the pattern of things you enjoy,  but once you find it, be authentic about it. It’s okay to say that something is good and that you enjoyed it. Everything you read doesn’t have to be a revelation of the highest order, nor does it have to be something that you despise and would publicly denounce. Sometimes just finding something enjoyable is enough.

This is how I approach my reviews and why a one-star or a five star are so vanishingly rare among my reviews. The highest high or lowest low truly should be rare. Reviews should not fall into the same category as The Boy Who Cried Wolf. Scream and yell on too many occasions and people will presume that is your default setting. Keep panning for that gold and be sure to share your treasured fines with others.