When I see people talking about rating books, it seems like a lot of the time they’re focused on the quality of the books.
Like a 5 star being a masterpiece.
Whereas I rate entirely based off enjoyment. A book can be objectively poorly written, but if it excited me and I loved it, I’ll give it a 4 or 5.
I’ve also read objectively well-written books that I just didn’t enjoy. So I’ve given them a 2.
Obviously, a lot of the time quality and enjoyment go hand and hand. You’re more likely to enjoy something that’s written well.
But I feel like a lot of the time when I’m rating things, my enjoyment rating varies from what my “quality” rating would be.
It makes me wonder your thought process is when you rate things. Do you find yourself considering one more than the other? Or do you base if off something else entirely?
Obviously, there’s no right or wrong way to do it!
submitted by /u/Harakiri_238[link] [comments]