Smart Podcast, Trashy Books Podcast

476. Behind the Scenes of Reviewing Romance with Shana and Amanda

In our last collection of Patreon listener questions, we had two about the process of reviewing: what we look for, and what questions we’re trying to answer when we write a review. Shana joins Amanda and me to talk about the process of reviewing romance, how reviewing helps us identify what we most like to read, and how reading and review works for each of us as writers, and for me doing editorial oversight.

Thank you to Patreon members Tara C. and Leslee for the very kind and thoughtful questions!

Music: Purple-planet.com

Read the transcript

↓ Press Play

This podcast player may not work on Chrome and a different browser is suggested. More ways to listen →

Here are the books we discuss in this podcast:

We talked about many reviews in this episode:

If you like the podcast, you can subscribe to our feed, or find us at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows!

More ways to sponsor:

Sponsor us through Patreon! (What is Patreon?)

What did you think of today's episode? Got ideas? Suggestions? You can talk to us on the blog entries for the podcast or talk to us on Facebook if that's where you hang out online. You can email us at [email protected] or you can call and leave us a message at our Google voice number: 201-371-3272. Please don't forget to give us a name and where you're calling from so we can work your message into an upcoming podcast.

Thanks for listening!

Transcript

Click to view the transcript

This podcast transcript was handcrafted with meticulous skill by Garlic Knitter. Many thanks.

Remember to subscribe to our podcast feed, find us on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Smart Podcast, Trashy Books is part of the Frolic Podcast Network. Find many more outstanding podcasts at Frolic.media/podcasts!
Categorized:

Uncategorized

Add Your Comment →

  1. Kareni says:

    Thank you, Sarah, Amanda, and Shana; I really enjoyed your discussion! Thank you, Garlic Knitter, for the transcript.

  2. Margaret says:

    OMG, Sarah, THANK YOU for saying “joins Amanda and me.” I just did a happy dance of joy. I also enjoyed the podcast and loved the Viking joke. But true confessions: I love the site and have been reading for years, but I’m too old to have read the Sweet Dreams, and I’m probably in the minority (and I’m sorry!!), but I don’t love or read most of the site’s reviews. They’re too long and go into far too much detail. I’m a reader who wants to approach a book with an open mind, so the one sentence plugs or “not worth it” mentions in Watcha Reading is usually all I need. But you give me those on a regular basis, so thank you again!

  3. Super good podcast (as usual, so no surprise).
    The comment a “book about a book” for me thinking – a book with all your reviews would be SO COOL! One for each year?
    “20XX in Review”
    And heck – it’s already written!!
    (And the sales of the review books could fund the podcast in part)

  4. Stefanie Magura says:

    That episode was both informative and hilarious. The comments about how books can sometimes get passed from one reviewer to another helped answer a question I have which is the following. Sometimes I have noticed that you’ll have reviews for books in a series, and the first book is reviewed by one person and the second is reviewed by someone else. How does that come about? I would think that having the same person review all the books in a series would help with continuity, but I can also see how that would be impractical in real world situations. Any thoughts?

  5. Qualisign says:

    This podcast about the review process at SBST was wonderful. One of the things I most appreciate about SBTB and the SBTB reviews is the care taken with them. (Bless you @SBSarah for providing a much needed moral compass and safe space for the reviews. As usual, you rock for all the work you put into their editing.)

    Like @Margaret, book reviews often seem very long if I’m just wondering about whether or not to read a given book. I definitely lean on the lightning reviews and reader comments for new books to read. I read the longer reviews for thoughtful reflection on issues rather than for a simple recommendations, and I have gotten some wonderful insights from those reviews. Commenting SBTB-ers clearly have learned much from SBTB about what fellow readers want to know about a book.

  6. Amanda says:

    @Stefanie: So we have a big excel sheet where reviewers can “claim” books. All someone has to do is write down the book they want to review and sometimes another reviewer claims a sequel or other installment.

    The team, though, is usually open to doing a joint review if asked. Hope that answers your question!

  7. Quinn Wilde says:

    I will second that I appreciate the fact all the Smart Bitches reviews take into consideration whether the romance set the reviewer on fire, but also social and literary considerations. For me, the ideal book is one I feel an emotional connection to, but also flows on the level of the sentence and takes me to another world (I love historical romance in particular). A good romance book review will balance all of these elements. I’m okay with old, problematic romances to some extent, but appreciate if the reviewer mentions it!

    I too, even for my Goodreads account, have struggled to finish a terrible book so I can, in good conscience, write a bad review, although I rarely leave negative reviews (only of books by dead authors or books popular enough to be critic-proof).

    I love many kinds of books, but high fantasy is the only no-go for me. I must confess that books in this genre tend to be terribly long is another factor against reading/reviewing these books.

  8. chacha1 says:

    This was a great conversation. 🙂 I read almost all the reviews on SBTB even though I end up reading very few of the reviewed books! This is not because I don’t trust the reviews but because I read mostly M/M.

    That said, I’ve found numerous new authors to follow through SBTB. I like the analytical approach precisely because it *will* daylight a book that I would’ve otherwise never known about.

    The only other review site I frequent is QueeRomance Ink, even though many of their reviews are for sub-genres that aren’t my jam. There was another site I followed for a while but some kind of technical glitch happened that meant I couldn’t access it. It had become a discouraging time sink anyway so I didn’t pursue correcting the situation (discouraging in the sense that the same 6 people commented on everything, there were multiple ‘desert island books’ every week (kind of torpedos the usefulness of the term), and the M/M material they favored was often the romantic-suspense brutalize-the-gay-men kind of thing I’d prefer not to read.

    Anyway, this discussion is also informative because it confirms the importance of a blurb. I’ve done my best with mine but I wonder, would SBTB reviewers ever consider offering editorial review of *only* a blurb? I’d pay for that. Like: does this blurb prompt any interest at all or is it a turn-off. What’s missing, what’s too much, etc.

  9. JoVE says:

    I loved this episode. Thank you.

Add Your Comment

Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

↑ Back to Top