[REBLOG (and worth the read)] Let's Dissect: The Idiocy of GoodReads YA Bingo

If you want to see an author act like an idiot and shoot themselves and their career in the foot these days, all you have to do is go to Twitter where you can find little gems like this.  I thought that today, I’d dissect the logic of this Bingo card.  Because, you know, I like to waste time with nonsense like this.   If the Tweet somehow goes a disappearing in the next few days.  I took a screen shot for prosperity sake (though it’s not a good screen shot).  Also, there’s other blogs that will no doubt cover it as well and have better tech skills as well.


Screen shot 2015-02-04 at 11.01.49 AM


I will be going through the squares top to bottom horizontally.


Obviously, I don’t own this little bingo card.  I am merely using it’s contents to point out its fallacies.  The bolded text is directly taken from the Bingo card which belongs to Amy  Spalding and her wasted lunch.


Reviewer angry teen characters are acting like teens:


How do you define acting out like a teen?  One teen can act out  completely different from another.  Most teens I know don’t act like your stereotypical dumb YA heroine throwing a tantrum. I mean, I haven’t met anyone who would sit like a zombie for six months when they’re boyfriend left them.  Because remember Harry Potter, he threw a big temper tantrum and…wait, he reacted different from Bella.  I knew it, teens do act different when they get mad.


Reviewer likes something but still points out that “other readers might not like it”:


It’s called trigger warnings, my friend.  And I appreciate them in reviewers.  It keeps me and other reviewers who might be sensitive to an issue from reading the book and thus doing….this.



Reviewer thinks YA book is “pretty good for a kids’ book”


I’ve never said this.  But so what, if someone does?  They are still giving you a compliment they are just stating that the book is geared towards a younger audience.  Which it is.  Plus, a lot of YA today is geared for adults instead of teens-i.e. there are some books in the genre that are a lot more mature than others.


Reviewer thinks because they would never react a certain way, no one would:




I know in my reviews I’ve pointed out that the reactions of a character seem a bit unrealistic. This is one of the arguments, out of many on this stupid card, that is written in a bias like manner.  I can recall a few books that I’ve pointed out that the reaction seems off.  And you know what, totally my opinion.  I think there are some situations, like when a girl is almost killed and agrees to go with her would be  kidnappers to a different continent that it can pretty much be a universal come on.


Reviewer list star rating in precise fraction:


Well, isn’t it better your book is being rounded up than down?  Seriously, I have rated several one star worthy books a two because I rounded them up.  And seriously, what made the five star method a required standard.  You’d think for authors who are so concerned about the overall rating of their books, they’d like it when I rounded up their book babies.


Reviewer expresses opinions only in gif form:


This guy right here is why gifs are totally appropriate.


Reviewer downrates for presence of drugs, swearing, and/or sex:


Is the review site or the reviewer geared towards clean books?  There are quite a few of these sites that exist, and while Im not a huge fan they do serve a purpose to that segment of the population who wants to be aware of these issues.  And I get it.  I’ve been to several book signings, and sometimes there are kids there that are way too young to be reading about some of the adult situations that are presented in these books.  So, while I myself might not care if the characters have intercourse every other page, I totally get a parent caring about these sorts of things.


Reviewer confuses presence of issue/situation as author condoning advocating it:


Honey, it’s how you present the issue.  If it’s presented poorly, you’re going to be called out on it.  It doesn’t matter if you’re not condoning/advocating it, poor presentation is just as bad.


Reviewer might actually be referring to a different book, impossible to tell:



Reviewer liked book until character was revealed to be gay:


Once again, illy phrased to get a reaction.  While I’m sure there are some people who will put a book down if a character is gay, I think probably the majority of this frustration is that the revelation seems out of place.  Or the character ends up being gay just so that the book can have a designated token character.


Reviewer takes off stars for bad decisions made early in the book later amended:


Yeah, but did the bad decisions make sense at the time they happened?  If they did, it doesn’t matter how much amending is done the book’s been spoiled.  Why  should I continue if there’s stupidity to begin with?


Reviewer gives book 1 star.  Book isn’t fully drafted yet:


Bet you like those five star reviews that are given before the book is fully drafted.


Adult reviewer think it’s book’s fault they relate more to parent characters:


Notice the use of the word adult.  I think Stanton is trying to stigmatize adult readers of YA at this point.  Never mind, they supposedly saved the publishing industry last year.


Reviewer angry at author who blurbed book leading them astray:


Hmmm, too vague to make a comment on.  I think I’m being lead astray.


Reviewer has issues with book’s grammar makes grammatical errors in review:


The difference, I’m paying money for your work (and you should have an editor/beta reader).  I do not.


Reviewer dislikes something that didn’t happen in book:


Well, isn’t that the point of the review to talk about your likes and dislikes.



Reviewer admits not finishing book, makes assumptions instead, rates on said assumptions:


Shouldn’t you be glad they admitted to a DNF?   Some people don’t.  And besides that, they have a right to review the book however they want on what part of the book they want.  It should also be mentioned, that often literary criticisms focus on mere sections of the book and that English professors sometimes only assign sections of the book too.  If academia thinks it’s okay, then I really don’t see why this is a problem.


Reviewer wanted book to be one thing, book was other thing:


Once again, irrelevant.  The review is suppose to be about how the reviewer viewed the book.  I think they were.


Reviewer assumes any underlying themes were accidental:


Perhaps, you should read this article on what literary criticism is.  I get that it’s a difficult concept to grasp, so I think the Wiki version should suffice for you for now.


Reviewer thinks girl main character is whiny, unlikeable, unsympathetic:


Well, are they?


Reviewer said teen characters didn’t end book/series with marriage:


I don’t know where they got this one, but once again the reviewer is talking about the book.  So….you can’t fault them for that.


Reviewer thinks “Some” diversity is OK but not “too much”:


This one is just asking for a fight.  I love the way it’s phrased.  The use of quotations is clearly trying to get a reaction there as well.  For me, I love diversity in books, but I hate it when diversity is essentially watered down to create token characters.


Reviewer thinks rich main character should have zero complaints:


Studies do show that money can buy happiness to a certain point.  So, yeah, they shouldn’t have as many complaints than the lower 99%


Reviewer downrates for perception of factual error that is actually correct:


In your universe?  Maybe you did Google something and it seems correct to you, but if someone…say a lawyer is reading a book where a legal issue is grossly mishandled even though the initial Wiki research  than you’re wrong.  And I’ve seen this happen a lot.  I’m sure it happens in other areas as well.  I know it happened in a marching band book I’ve read.


Source: http://howdyyal.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/lets-dissect-the-idiocy-of-goodreads-young-adult-bingo
Reblogged from Howdy YAL!