Never Judge a Book by its Movie

I found an interesting critic on Yahoo Voices (first time reading something on this site) focusing on One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (sorry to beat a dead horse) and the book vs. movie debate. He argues the book "is by far better than the movie". He recommends that everyone should read the book before watching the movie because it is impossible to cover everything in the novel. Many parts are excluded or otherwise changed to fit the average time limit of two hours. When watching a movie, the presentation is shown the way the producers want you to see it. When reading a book, you imagine the characters the way you want to. This works both ways. Some may like that the book comes alive in movies with characters and scenery, but others may favor the imagination inherent in reading books. No scene in the book exists where the patients go out and play basketball. Also in the movie, McMurphy gets away and takes the boys fishing while in the book the fishing trip is organized. These slight changes show that the director wants to make the movie more fast paced and entertaining to the audience. Another interesting viewpoint is that if you read the book before the movie, you might have certain expectations for the movie which can lead to disappointment, neutrality or approval. 

Analyzing the critic, he is not an expert, so readers have to be critical. The best audience for these kind of reviews would be those who have read the book and watched the movie. He had several typos and did not even finish his sentence, so this decreases his credibility. However, I still enjoyed what he had to say, and he did bring up some valid points, but maybe not in the best English. The purpose of his post is to share his thoughts and feelings about the debate of books turned into novels, which is very prevalent in our culture. After seeing a movie based on a book, almost everyone leaving the theater will talk about the differences and which form they liked better. He posted his opinions on the internet so that everyone can stumble upon it (it was the first return on a google search of "one flew over the cuckoo's nest book vs movie"). He does a good job of persuading the audience that the book is better by emphasizing how movies always exclude or differ in many parts. And in the case of Cuckoo's Nest, the film added a basketball scene and makes the fishing trip spontaneous.

Do the books always win more audience approval than movies? I can't think of any movie that was significantly better than the book (Harry Potter...no. Hunger Games...no. To Kill a Mockingbird...no). Maybe The Notebook was better in movie form? Haha. What movie do you think is better than the book? Why do books become movies in the first place? It is all about the money and fame. The book pushes readers to watch the movie, and the movie encourages those who haven't read it to read it. Granted I think more readers will watch the movie, and less movie watchers will read the book. This is just because of society's emphasis on instant gratification. Movie watchers will not want to sit and read a book for a couple days if they have already watched the movie about the general plot of the book. However, some people are inspired to read the book if the movie was really good to receive more minute details. I did that with Twilight, not because the movie was really good, but I was curious in how Meyer crafted the characters in book form.


Personally, I feel like I'll always enjoy the books more so than the movies because I value the magical imagination that the book offers.

Reader and Reviewer Culture Today

Anyone and everyone can write a book review these days as long as they have access to the Internet. People no longer have to go through the long process of editing and so on for their review to get published in an official publication. These public reviews by normal people, meaning people like us, who aren’t exactly “experts” in the field of English and composition, give potential readers a different perspective on what a particular book is about.

I was going through the reviews for Tina Fey’s biography Bossypants and found that the “most helpful” review was one written by Alan Mazer titled “Good Read!”. At the top left corner of the review we can see that 503 out of 547 people thought his review was helpful. Does this mean that it is a good review? He begins the review by describing Bossypants as a “good memoir”; justifying why he gave the book a five star rating. By expressing the fact that he isn’t a Tina Fey fan, he makes his review relatable to a much wider range of readers and potential readers interested in the book. People who are fans of Tina Fey will probably have a biased opinion on the book, affected by their affection for the author. Therefore, in his review, Mazer speaks for most of the people who either don’t know who Tina Fey is, or has never been a big fan of hers. Since this book is a biography/memoir, the review describes Tina Fey as a funny and honest woman who has worked hard to “make it” in a male dominated industry. Mazer also recommends that not only Tina Fey fans, but working mothers and wives read this book as it may relate to what they themselves are going through. Furthermore, since he is a man and he admits to enjoying the book, he shows that Bossypants will appeal to a wider range of audience than just women juggling work and their personal life.

As I mentioned earlier, public reviews work to give readers an alternative perspective when deciding on a book. By allowing the public to post reviews on their website, Amazon stands to gain more profit. Even if a book gets a poor review by a professional, some readers might be swayed by a review written by somebody they can relate to. The public reviewers don’t claim to be experts; their reviews are just their personal opinions. Although “experts” who write book reviews try to be objective, they are still human and everyone has different tastes. Even so, many people still prefer and trust expert reviews, thinking that public reviews are less reliable. Do you think that this is a legitimate concern when it comes to book reviews?

With countless numbers of book reviews currently on the Internet, we can see that book reviews possess some form of cultural value. A review of a book written in the 1950s for example would be different or the same depending on the values held today and if they have changed from that time. Also, since it is only natural to want to fit in, public book reviews and ratings tend to skew on one side. They show potential readers that this is what majority of the public think of the book and this might affect a person’s decision when forming an opinion on the book.

Personally, I don’t read book reviews before I read a book so I can form my own opinion on it. I know that if I read the reviews, my mind will consciously or subconsciously create expectations for the book that were not there previously. What do you think? Is it better to read reviews before reading a book?

Honestly Opinionated

Honestly Opinionated

I don’t think I have ever read book reviews on Amazon.com before (I didn’t even know there were so many people who took time to write them). To be honest, I usually read books because my friends or family tell me they’re good. I decided to research the book Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. The book overall got 4 out of 5 stars. I personally probably would have given it 5, but the rare few who gave the book a 2 or a 1 have drastically different views from those who saw this book as inspirational. Between two reviews that are entitled “changes the way I see the world” and “extremely thought provoking” there is a review called “what did I just read?” This person says, “If the book was written intentionally this bad so the reader would be driven to burn the book in some kind of elaborate ironic metaphor, then maybe I get it.” Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However judging by the quality of this sentence, I don’t think I would trust this reader. How much of an impact does well written sentences and proper english have on the reader of these book reviews? I think that says more about the reader than the opinion in the review.

 There is also the question whether these book reviews are really in response to the book or are just responding to other book reviews. In one review I read, right after a poor review, the reviewer said “It’s short and sweet and makes you think, if you are capable of thinking.” I feel this is a stab at the readers who disliked the novel. Also, I think that may be a little uncalled for because the review right before his was a high schooler. Can we really trust the reviews of these books if they are written by what could be 12 year-olds? Are their opinions important?


 I believe in writing, as in any art form, there is an ideal audience. However, it is important to see the opposing viewpoint. I am sure authors learn a great deal, not only from the good reviews but especially from the bad reviews. But, do authors change their writing style or storylines to fit those who are discontent with their previous novels? Should they? On Amazon anyone can click on a reviewer and see everything they have ever reviewed. Many of the people who have reviews, review almost everything they buy whether it be novels or soundtracks.

Anyone can see what they have reviewed, and could even judge their review on the kind of other things they review. If I had a common interest in books or movies as a reviewer I definitely think that would sway my opinion of them to trust their recommendations. Although there are some who dislike the book very much, would that persuade you from not reading the book if there are still good reviews? (And vice versa?) There is such access to these reviews with the internet now and people are not afraid to voice their own opinion. I think this is ultimately helpful to not only readers but authors as well.

Don't Simply Believe What You See First

I chose the predictable route and examined One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest on Amazon. I found two versions of the book on the site, and I read both of the pages. To be honest, I have never really paid much attention to book reviews. I normally pick up a book to read by friend's recommendations or I read the back of the book. Do you read book reviews before reading the actual book? The site includes reviews by official publications:

"A glittering parable of good and evil." —The New York Times Book Review

"A roar of protest against middlebrow society’s Rules and the Rulers who enforce them." —Time

These short reviews compared to reader's extensive posts decreases the helpfulness. They are really vague also, so they do not provide much substance.

The book distributor website offers a nice function that shows you the highest rated reviews first, so all of the ones on the front page are positive. It is really interesting to see that readers do put in a lot of time crafting their response. They provide background information about Kesey to contextualize the gist of the novel and some recap some of the novel too and they finally write their own take on the novel and what they took away after reading it. Reading the insightful reviews really does make me excited to read the book. Some examples:

"I recommend you run, not walk, to get this book."

"I was, forever inspired and ultimately liberated in mind to finally realize that you can take away a man's life, but never his freedom."

Some of these people are really selling the book. Naturally, I wanted to find some bad reviews amongst all this praise. Quite a few gave the book one or two stars because of its tragic nature:

"Great reading, but for God's sake don't read it when you're depressed."

One of the bad reviews was from a mother who picked up the book after her son read it for a high school English class. She gives it discussion merit, but essentially despises the book because evil triumphs in the end and that depressed her.

From examining both sides, I think Amazon should not only show the higher rated posts on the front page because the lesser rated posts does have merit. I completely understand why the mother did not like this book, and I feel that is a very important aspect to consider when trying to get a thorough feel for a book.

These book reviews represent that people are still passionate about literature and they would take the time to review books they've read so others can engage in a deeper conversation with them or simply be encouraged to read the book themselves. The online book reviews perpetuates the US literary/readership culture. I also really like the shift from only official publication's reviews to reviews by everyday people. The change definitely added more personality, flair and humor into responses and I feel more compelled to read what other people thought about the book rather than a name brand company's take on it. Do you enjoy the blurbs of praise from official publications in the front of many books?

The purpose of the book reviews is not simply to persuade others to read/buy the books, but it fosters a literary community where others can join in the conversations of other readers or challenge their take on the novel. Another could be for the affirmation and accomplishment the reader feels after posting a review. It could be some people's traditions to post a review after they finish a book. This could help improve their memory of the book's content by applying critical analysis. What other purpose do you think book reviews serve?

Amazon invites book reviews for the obvious reason of making more money. This could be their motive for only putting five starred reviews on the front page. By allowing readers to provide feedback, they could gain loyal fans to their websites which in turn would increase their revenue also. I see this mainly as a business tactic. Do you see this in another light? If so, how?

J.K. Rowling

The Harry Potter series has made J.K. Rowling one of the most well known authors in the world. As a huge fan of the books, I decided to look up her twitter account. She doesn’t have a long descriptive profile, just author. I think this reflects on how she sees herself as just an author instead of “author of the Harry Potter series”. She does have a link to her website though for people who are interested to learn more about her.

Also, I was surprised to find that she is not very active on twitter. Most of her tweets are just statements to clarify that this is indeed her real twitter account. She also admits that we will not be hearing much from her as she says, “pen and paper are still my priority”. I feel like she’s suggesting that she doesn’t have time for twitter because she is focusing on her writing. Additionally, by using the words “pen and paper” instead of just her writing, we can tell that J.K. Rowling is old school and doesn’t really care much for these social networks. She probably made the twitter account so her fans would know that she is the real J.K. Rowling and not to follow any imposters.

Her twitter does have links to other of her more active online profiles like her official website and Pottermore. Her website tells more about the author and her other projects (Rowling has a new book that will be published this September) whereas Pottermore is more like an online platform for all things Harry Potter. It gives the readers a chance to rediscover the Potter series with additional notes from the author and more detailed descriptions of the characters. You can also connect with other Harry Potter fans and even your friends on Pottermore. I think this reflects on how the digital age has changed literary culture. Readers today have the opportunity to explore their favorite books more in depth. With the help of the social media, the book has grown to be more than just a children’s book; it created a whole new world for the fans and readers of the series to explore and completely immerse themselves into. Personally, I don’t follow J.K. Rowling on twitter but I do have a Pottermore account. In a way, Pottermore can be seen as J.K. Rowling’s version of twitter, where she isn’t limited to just 140 characters to express her feelings yet still be able to stay connected to her fans. Do you think people will just forget about Harry Potter without sites like Pottermore? 

From looking at other social media profiles and blogs, not just J.K. Rowling’s, we can see how readers today have access to the kind of writing by their favorite authors that they would never have been exposed to if not for the internet. Readers are able to gain insight to the authors mind and style of writing. While exploring Pottermore, I was actually surprised when I realized how personal writing could be for an author. J.K. Rowling incorporated so many elements of her personal life into the books that readers wouldn’t normally notice. 

Jodi Picoult

I have read a few books by Jodi Picoult, and I have enjoyed them thoroughly. So, I decided to look her up online and see what her facebook page was like. I have been to her website before which is her promotional website for her books (jodipicoult.com). However on facebook I see posts that she has personally written about her political views, and pictures she has recently posted from events she has attended. Her headshot appears in both her website and her facebook profile. I personally think she’s overusing the shot, and could have more variety. She has built herself an online profile full of pictures of books and book signing sessions. She has many fans, and her latest picture is a large billboard with that same headshot. I think she is kind of a diva as far as authors go. I don’t see many other book billboards these days. Her online profile does look very professional. She is always dressed will in all of her pictures, and she is self promotional without going over the top. I think she has a nice balance between personal posts, and promoting interviews and new books. One thing I noticed about both of her pages is how much she involves her kids. She is obviously happy to be a mother, and I think that appeals to a lot of people. She has most recently written a book with her daughter called, Between the Lines. She is not only promoting her own career, but starting her daughter’s. She seems more human than most authors. It may seem egotistical to put a large picture on the back of a book, just as all of hers have, but I am starting to think it is smart. She is a celebrity in the world of novels. Her headshot is just as recognizable to me as any other celebrity. Does this make people want to buy her books more? Should an author have to do all of this advertising to sell a book if it is a good book? Her political orientation can not only be found in her books and her writing, but it is the first thing on her facebook page. She has posted a link to the Huffington Post article about Obama backing the issue of gay marriage. I personally like this because I read the Huffington Post and support gay marriage, but if someone did not support the issue would that hinder their view of the books? Would they stop reading her books all together? She has taken a political stance and I admire that, and I don’t think she takes it too far. I enjoy her books, and her websites actually make me want to read more of her books. They are simple, and interesting. She has a family value in her sites which makes her seem more like a real person. Her family vacation pictures definitely outline that. Her three children obviously mean the world to her, enough to put them as co-authors of some of the books she writes. I think that is a very smart idea.

The Mastermind of Love

 

I decided to follow Nicholas Sparks on Twitter. I have read five of his books and hope to read them all one day. He is my go-to when I want to experience every human emotion possible. He tweets almost everyday, mostly quotes about his novels and movies. He also re-tweets many of his followers. An example of a reader response he re-tweeted was: "@SparksNicholas #inspiration making me believe in true love". He also has many pictures of him and his fans on his twitter account too. He has a link to his website at the top of his twitter.

On his website, he lists all the books he has written. An informal interview with the author is also posted under the synopsis with questions asking why particular things happened in the novel. He has a biographical section, FAQ, novel learning series for when teachers want to use his books in the classroom, writing tips and recommended reads. On his writing tips page, he listed several writing books for people to read, two of which were On Writing by Stephen King and Elements of Style by William Strunk. Interestingly, I read King's book in AP Language, and we talked about Elements of Style in English 367.02. Something that stood out to me is that he created the Nicholas Sparks Foundation selling signed copies of his books benefiting his non profit organization for education. He and his wife have donated $10,000,000 to local, regional and national causes - including education, veteran support, Alzheimer’s care and research, childhood disease research and care, and animal rescue organizations, but education remains a top priority. All in all, his website is a much better representation of him than twitter. Information wise, twitter is very limited due to the 140 character constraint, but the advantage is getting to know the author on a more personal level. I feel very connected to him because of his genuineness. I also liked how it highlighted other activities he enjoys doing besides writing, such as running 30 miles a week, spending time with his five children, lifting weights four times a week and Tae Kwon Do.

He is really technology savvy because his website contains the links to his Facebook, WhoSay, Twitter, Google+ and Youtube. This is a good move for literary culture because the internet is such a pervasive part of our lives now, and it makes receiving and posting information really fast. We learn much more on social media, than by just reading the front and back covers of the book. If we stuck to the traditional novel, all the information we'd get is where the author lives, his family, his books and awards he's received. That does not tell much about a person. On the other hand, their facebook, twitter and personal blogs could contain all the information you've ever wanted to know about the author. Hard copied books do not offer that much space for the author to engage with the reader on a personal level.

This might have been the first time that I have researched an author's life and social media presence. I don't follow author's social media because I enjoy reading for the content the story holds and don't really care that much for who wrote it. Do any of you follow your favorite author on the internet? And why? Authors are in a totally different sphere than celebrities. Most people do follow celebrities because it is entertainment, and when given the chance to see them in real life, they would jump at the opportunity. Whereas, most people would not be so enthused at a book signing. Will this ever change?

When I think of literary culture, I think of a community that is fostered by literature. This is so easily seen on facebook fan pages of people, brands and things. The most eminent might be the virtual Harry Potter world of Pottermore by J.K. Rowling. All of these outlets brings people with common interests together. Virtual communities are very effective when it comes to easy accessibility. What do you think of traditional book clubs? Do they work or will they become obsolete one day?