How I rate books
As can be seen in my reading log, I generally assign a rating to every book I read. In this post, I will document the point of these ratings and how I use the scale.
These ratings are not meant to be an objective ranking of the quality of the book. I am not well enough read to be qualified to make such judgements. Nor do I have interest in making these calls.
Instead, the ratings reflect my immediate reaction to the book.
Did I enjoy the book? Did it make me think? Did it make me question some long held belief? Did it provoke emotional reactions?
These are the kinds of things that make me value a book. If the answer to one or more of these questions is yes, I might give the book a high rating.
I use a scale from 1 to 5 when rating books:
- Absolutely epic stuff. Among the most impactful works I've ever consumed.
- Pretty damn great! Already sad that it's over.
- Not bad. Pretty good, actually, but not necessarily great.
- This book wasn't for me.
A glaring omission from the list is the lowest score. That's because, so far, I've never read a book that's come close to being a one. If I did, I probably wouldn't bother finishing the book, and thus wouldn't give it a score. Heck, the fact that someone took the time to write a book is generally enough to convince me it deserves a higher score than one out of five.
Note the point that the ratings reflect my immediate reaction after reading the book. I rarely go back and alter rankings. But, in some cases, I've found that the weeks and months that following after finishing changes my perception of the book. Impact sometimes takes time and reflection. In those cases I might increase the rating.