What was the reviewer trying to say? What does the author get from such a review?
This is an example of a bad review. Not only is it so vague that it could apply to any book and the author has received no critical criticisms, for improvement.
A review such as this one, is usually provided by a relative, so they don't hurt anyone. Not that you're out to hurt people!
There is no right way to write a review but a good review should include:
- a description of the book. (ISBN #, title, author, copyright date, type of book, and anything else needed to identify the story.
- what is the general subject matter, the theme, and thesis.
- a critical analysis, of the books strengths and weaknesses
- an evaluation on the quality, meaning and significance of the book, not a retelling.
- provides evidence to support views.
- subject matter
- view point, setting, plot, character
- the author's objective
- the intended audience
- style, quality, fluidity
- how the book affects you, good or bad.
- whether you would recommend it or not.
- how descriptive, the narration, the explanation and the argument, the author's side on the issue.
Evaluate the accuracy, the conclusions, what has been omitted, the objectivity of the author.
Does the author have any other published works? Consider, characters, style, theme, setting, biography, and history.
Nothing is more frustrating for an author than to read a review of a book he has written and it says nothing. Zilch! towards reviewing the book. If you are going to write a review. Do it right!
*Most important. Don't give the story away...