The bad book review describes the plot and then gives a star rating. You’ve read hundreds of these. They exist in vast quantities on every platform that allows them, and they communicate almost nothing. A summary of the plot is available on the back cover. An opinion unsupported by argument is not useful to anyone deciding whether to read the book.
Good book reviews do something harder: they engage with what the book is actually doing, evaluate how well it does it, and communicate that evaluation in terms that are useful to a reader who may have different tastes.
The Central Question
Before you write anything, answer this: what is this book trying to do? Not what is it about — what is it for? What experience is it designed to create? What problem is it trying to solve?
A horror novel is trying to frighten you. A romance is trying to make you feel the pull of an impossible relationship. A literary novel might be trying to make you see something differently. A thriller is trying to make you turn pages at midnight.
Once you know what the book is trying to do, you can evaluate how well it succeeds. This is the basis for a review that is useful even to readers who disagree with your conclusion.
What to Cover
The thing it does well. Almost every book does something well. Even bad books have useful things to say about the craft of writing — if only as examples of what not to do. But most books are not bad; most books are making genuine attempts at something, and the interesting question is whether the attempt succeeds.
The thing it fails at. Honest criticism requires identifying the failures. The review that only praises is marketing. The review that only criticizes is venting. The useful review identifies both.
Who it’s for. Some books are not for you and are for someone else. Being clear about this is more useful than insisting that a book you didn’t enjoy is objectively bad.
What to Avoid
Plot summary as the body of the review. One paragraph of context is appropriate. A full retelling of the story is not a review.
Spoilers without warning. Some books cannot be reviewed without discussing their endings. Warn readers.
Personal attacks on the author. You are reviewing the book, not the person.
Vague claims. “The writing is beautiful” means nothing. “The prose uses unusually short sentences to create a sense of suppressed urgency that the plot requires” means something.
The best book reviews are pieces of writing in their own right — essays that could be read by someone who will never read the book and still be worth reading.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the most common failure of a bad book review? The article identifies plot summary as the defining failure: ‘The bad book review describes the plot and then gives a star rating.’ A summary is available on the back cover, so restating it communicates almost nothing. An opinion unsupported by argument is equally useless to anyone deciding whether to read the book.
What central question should you answer before writing a book review? The article says to ask ‘what is this book trying to do?’ — not what it is about, but what experience it is designed to create and what problem it is solving. A horror novel is trying to frighten; a romance is trying to make you feel the pull of an impossible relationship. Once you know the book’s intent, you can evaluate how well it succeeds.
What three things should a book review always cover? The article specifies: the thing the book does well, the thing it fails at, and who it is for. The review that only praises is marketing; the review that only criticizes is venting. Being clear about audience is described as more useful than insisting a book you didn’t enjoy is objectively bad.
What language mistakes make a book review less useful? The article warns against vague claims, illustrating with an example: ‘The writing is beautiful means nothing. The prose uses unusually short sentences to create a sense of suppressed urgency that the plot requires means something.’ Specificity is the standard — claims need to be supported by observable features of the text.
How should a book reviewer handle spoilers? The article acknowledges that some books cannot be reviewed without discussing their endings, but the rule is simple: warn readers. Plot summary as the body of the review is discouraged — one paragraph of context is described as appropriate, while a full retelling is not a review.
Further Reading from Authoritative Sources
- book review as a form — Wikipedia’s book review article contextualises the form’s history and conventions, helping readers understand the craft tradition that this guide is working within and what distinguishes useful criticism from mere opinion.
- literary criticism — Wikipedia’s literary criticism article provides the broader intellectual tradition from which book reviewing descends, helping readers understand why the article’s emphasis on argument, specificity, and engagement with a book’s intent reflects longstanding critical practice.
