Friday, 19 July 2013
Do YOU Give Review Books More Priority?
Apart from needing an intriguing title to reel you all in, I've had a particular question in mind for a while now that I think is long over due a discussion post. That question, you ask? Are we, book bloggers, obligated to read review books from authors and publishers first and foremost before any other books that we, ourselves, may have bought or been gifted from other sources?
As you may have gathered this question is slightly more directed toward book bloggers, but even if you are not a book blogger, I'd still be really interested in knowing what you think! Before we get started, however, I'd just like to say that I'm not asking this question because I don't have my own answer to it. On the contrary, I already have my own opinion on this particular subject and are just merely curious if you, too, agree with me. Or disagree with me.
Personally, I do feel obligated - and give more priority - to reading and reviewing books given to us from authors/publishers for reviewing purposes first. I mean, they've been so gracious sending us the books, so it's only fair we post up a review as soon as we can, right?! HOWEVER, if I am craving a particular book that is not on my review pile or feel under pressure from all the review books I have to get through, I will read other books just to take a break from it all. If I don't then it usually leads to me going in a reading slump. And nobody wants that! So the question now is, is that the right thing to do?
I think it is. How are we, as reviewers, meant to give a fully honest review on a review book if, during the time we were reading it, our minds were elsewhere. Speaking from past experience, reading a book you feel obligated to read first while constantly thinking about a book you just bought that's been on your wishlist for ages is just not fun. Nor is it fair to that review book. You're just not able to give it the proper attention it deserves.
Whenever I start to feel guilty about reading my own book instead of one from my towering review pile, I always ask myself: Wouldn't authors/publishers prefer a review written after a slightly longer period of time where I've actually given that particular book a thorough chance - when I've properly been in the mood to read it - rather than a review written after only a short period of time where I've possibly rushed through the book only to move on to the one I've been thinking about all along?
But this is just my opinion. Now I want to hear - or rather, read - yours! :)
Do you agree with me? Disagree with me? Why? If you are an author or in publishing, what do you think? Anything to add? Comment below with your thoughts! :)