I’m asking this question because I am (happily) receiving an increasing number of books from Indie authors to read. And in some cases I have a bit of a dilemma when it comes to reviewing and rating them.
Some of the Indie books I’ve been reading are excellent. For these 4- and 5-star books, reviewing and rating them is no problem at all. They are a pleasure to read; a delight to review.
Some of them are less good or even poor. It’s these that are giving me a headache.
If the same book had been published by a mainline publisher I would have given it 1, 2 or 3 stars. I would have been honestly critical, and made my review public. (E.g. Philip Pullman should do better than this).
But for Indie authors I somehow feel more protective. Indie author Audrey Driscoll identifies why I feel this way: “A trad published book is the product of a company, with many more people behind it than the author. Most Indie books are created by their authors alone, so a critical review is by nature personal.”
Thus there seem to be two alternative approaches to reviewing: