Discussion: Why I Do This Crazy Thing Called Book Blogging

Every now and then I get asked something along the lines of, "Why do you take book blogging so seriously?/Do you get paid for this?/Why do you love doing this so much? It seems like a lot of work."

Well, no, I don't get paid for any of this and yes, it is a lot of work. But honestly: I don't care. I think any book blogger has been met with similar thought/questions form others--or even themselves; I know I've even wondered similar things myself. Because of this, I decided to write a post that attempts to explain exactly why I love book blogging.

I'm going to try to break this down into a few main reasons:

1. To encourage others to read.
Whether I'm encouraging people who don't read that much to pick up a book, encouraging regular readers to read a book outside of their comfort zone, or just encouraging readers to continue loving books, it's all great and something that I love. Reading is a brilliant way for people to expand their knowledge of the world and to discover different cultures, worlds, ways of life, and so much more. It's a way to enhance your vocabulary, to spirit you away into different worlds, to de-stress, to learn to write, to spark your own creativity, to find a home--the benefits are endless.

For me, there are few things more enjoyable than sharing my love of books with other people and furthering their own interest in books. In order to share a love of books with others, there needs to be other people that also love to read, and in this day and age the best way to get people to do that is to share your love of books online where others can see it. It's important to get out there and promote reading, and I think that book blogging is a fantastic way to encourage other people to read.

2. To promote authors/publishers!
I am more than aware that most big publishing houses actually have paid publicists and marketers that do their own promotions in a professional and much more effective manner than I do, but that doesn't mean that I can't also help to promote books and authors in my own way. I especially like to promote smaller presses and self-published authors whenever I have the ability to because I understand that sometimes the traditional route of publishing just doesn't always work. I have a pretty busy review schedule normally, but I always try my best to include self-published review requests. This can be daunting, especially since it means I get a lot more review requests than I would if I didn't, but I like to do it when I can because I want to help get the word out about new authors and their books. I can't always accept every review request, but I try to do what I can. Even if a book isn't necessarily 'my thing,' it my just become the new favorite of someone who read my blog and found it that way. I want to do my part to help spread the news about the books and authors I encounter through my days of reading.

3. To stay on top of and improve my own reading.
Book blogging really holds me accountable for my reading. I think I'm much more likely to read more when I know that there are more books out there that I want to read and review, and blogging makes me painfully aware of how many books there are out there that I want to read. It almost adds pressure in a fun way, if that makes any sense (?). Sometimes it does feel overwhelming, but that's when I just step back and remember why I'm doing this. Similarly, reviews help me think critically about books and also remember what I read better. By taking the time to think over the book, its characters, the plot, the pacing, the writing style, etc., I have a chance to ingrain the book more in my head and also work out those analysis skills I spent four years of college fine-tuning. In turn, this also helps me figure out more carefully exactly what I enjoy and look for in a good book, which is always a plus when picking out new books.

Another huge plus is that blogging also keeps me abreast of the upcoming releases and the great new books that are coming out, which is something that I was never good at doing before I started my blog. It used to be that I would find out that a book in a series that I really liked came out... almost a year later. Except Harry Potter--we always knew the release dates for Harry Potter books and movies.

4. I like to stay busy.
Honestly, I like work. I like having things to do. I love free time, but I go crazy if I have nothing to do and this is somewhat my 'free time' because I enjoy doing it. I'm crazy about having schedules and productive things to do, and book blogging helps me do that. Also, books are great for my mental health and really help me in ways I can't even describe.

5. The community
Holy hell, guys--who knew that I was missing out on such a fantastic bookish community all of the years before I started my blog? I have yet to meet a book blogger who is not amazing and welcoming and all-around fantastic. You don't even have to have an active blog to be a part of the book community--if you read and participate, you're welcome! Much of my experience with this community has been great and full of some of the most open-minded, hard-working people that I've ever met. I look forward to what the future holds for the book world, but I'm already incredibly pleased with how it is at present.

6. I love books!
This the most important reason, and the primary reason that I even started a blog in the first place. I wanted a place where I could talk about books and share my one main passion in life. I don't have a ton of hobbies other than reading (though I do have a few, I should probably add more) and I love having a place that I can talk about them all the time. I love having discussions with people and being able to visit the blogs of other like-minded book bloggers, and that just makes everything worth it. I may have started using affiliate links on my site, but in the end, it's all about the books (I'm just trying to keep eating also, I've become quite used to doing that).


Well, for those of you that made it through all of that -- thank you! Would you believe me when I said that all of that was the majorly edited down version of everything that I normally wrote? Because it was. I hope I managed to get across everything I meant with this post. I love doing this.

What is it that you love about book blogging? 

Never miss a post of bookish fun by subscribing to Forever Lost in Literature!

Planning to purchase a book or two? Consider purchasing on Book Depository through my affiliate link! Book Depository has worldwide free shipping and millions of titles to choose from.

I am also an Amazon affiliate, so if you'd prefer to shop through Amazon, just click the banner on the upper right hand side of my blog! (above the 'Follow by email' box, you may need to pause adblock to see it!)

Tell Me Something Tuesday: Were You Hesitant to Give Low Ratings When You First Started Blogging?

Tell Me Something Tuesday is a weekly discussion post hosted by Rainy Day Ramblings where a wide range of topics from books to blogging are discussed. Weigh in and join the conversation by adding your thoughts in the comments. If you want to do your own post, grab the question and answer it on your blog.

This week's discussion question is:

My answer: I definitely was! To be honest, I still am in some ways. I always want to give books the benefit of the doubt, but sometimes I can't help but dislike them. When I first started blogging, I made a promise to myself that I would always be completely honest in my reviews, no matter how much I may have disliked -- or even hated -- a book.

I don't like giving low ratings. I know that authors work incredibly hard to create their books, and I also realize the impact of knowing that my review may or may not sway someone from reading their book. Because of that, and because I don't think it's right, I don't ever trash an author or their book. I'm not afraid to say what I really disliked about a book, but I will always try to do it respectfully. I also like to point that hey, just because I hated something in a book, it doesn't mean that everyone will.

The most difficult times I've had with low reviews is when it is for a book that an author specifically reached out to me with for review. I don't want to negate their hard work, but I am also tied to my own honest values and I'm not going to shelter my words or feelings. One thing that I have learned is that if my review is three-stars or lower I will not post a link on Twitter or tag the author or publisher. It's not exactly fun to receive a notification to a review that hates your book, and I've heard many authors on Twitter voice their desire not to be tagged in negative reviews, and I want to respect that.

Despite the fact that I do still hesitate a little, I will say that I have become less hesitant over time. I've spoken with authors about this before and they often tell me that although it might hurt a little to have a poor review, a review is still a review and it is (usually) appreciated all the same. Other bloggers have also helped me to feel more confident as I see other low ratings and reactions to my own low ratings. I feel much more comfortable and confident overall.

So yes, I was still hesitant, and sometimes I still am, but I know that honesty is incredibly important in reviews and I don't want to lie about how I feel about a book.

So now I pose the same question to you: Do you hesitate to give low ratings? Have your feelings ever changed?

Get more reviews and bookish fun in your inbox and subscribe to Forever Lost in Literature!

Tell Me Something Tuesday: How Do You Handle DNF Books?

Tell Me Something Tuesday is a weekly discussion post hosted by Rainy Day Ramblings where a wide range of topics from books to blogging are discussed. Weigh in and join the conversation by adding your thoughts in the comments. If you want to do your own post, grab the question and answer it on your blog.

This week's discussion question is:

(note: for anyone who does not know, DNF = 'did not finish')

We've all (probably) been there: you've just started a book and it's not grabbing you yet, so you tell yourself to just hold on, maybe it'll get better -- but it doesn't. Then comes the question: push yourself and finish it or just give it up? Some people have no qualms with putting down a book, and some people hate doing that so much that they just push through. There is no right or wrong way, so I think DNFs are always an interesting discussion!

Personally, I will DNF a book if I am just not feeling it. I definitely try to push myself and give any book as much benefit of the doubt as possible, but sometimes it just doesn't happen. Or it even happens that sometimes a book might not actually be something I don't like, but it just doesn't fit my current mood, so I have to put it down and promise to come back to it later.

Where DNFs gets really tricky is when it comes to advanced review copies/galleys. If you have agreed to read and review a book, does that change how you feel about not finishing it? Do you feel obligated to finish a book? For me, I always try to finish any book that I have explicitly said I will read and review. Fortunately, I've not had many issues where I haven't wanted to finish a book I've agreed to review, and that's probably partly because I try really hard to screen the books that are offered for me to review.

Another area that lends itself to intense consternation regarding DNFs  is whether or not to review them in general. I usually like to leave a review for DNF books in order to explain why I didn't like it or what went wrong. This way others can still see your thoughts and also whether or not this is an issue that might bother them or if it's something that they, in contrast, love to see in a book. However, I also don't think it's vital to leave a review, because if I didn't want to spend time reading the book, I might not want to spend time leaving a review. It really just depends on the situations and reasons why I DNF a book.

But in the end, I think it's important to realize that we can't necessarily love every book we pick up, and that's okay! There are far too many fantastic books to read out there to waste time reading something you don't enjoy.

So now I pose the same question to you: What do you concerning DNF books? Do you have any problems with not finishing a book? Do you review them or feel obligated to finish ARCs? Let me know below!

Get more reviews and bookish fun in your inbox and subscribe to Forever Lost in Literature!

Discussion: Does it matter if a character is 'likable'?

Almost every review or discussion about a particular book includes some sort of comment - some in brief, some in detail - about whether a character was likable or unlikable. Often times, negative reviews result when readers find that a character was unlikable. Others, such as myself, can find enjoyment in a novel regardless of an unlikable character. Neither view is 'right' or 'wrong,' but it does lead the question: does it matter if the protagonist of a book is likable or unlikable?

First, it's probably useful to figure out what we even mean by a 'likable' character. Is it being able to relate to and empathize with a character's actions and emotions? Is it having a character that always tries to do the 'right' thing by following a strong moral compass, or it simply someone who has a strong, entertaining personality? Defining what makes a character likable is tricky, and probably differs according to each reader, but in general it seems to combine aspects of everything mentioned above. "But wait," you say, "isn't that just the definition of a well-written character?" Although yes, all of the former aspects are appreciated, it's not necessarily crucial for a character to hold strong moral values or have relatable qualities to be considered 'likable.' One example of a book in which I love the characters is Six of Crows, which is largely due to the incredibly charismatic personalities each character exhibits.

Conversely, what are unlikable characters? And this is where it gets really tricky, because there is a fine line between characters that are unlikable because they are poorly written and characters that are unlikable because of their own personal character. I've seen people lament the dislike of a certain book due to it having characters that made poor choices, had bad moral values, didn't care about right or wrong, or just simply didn't 'click' or relate with a reader. These are all completely valid points to make, but I don't think that means you have to automatically dislike a book because of an unlikable character.

Personally, I don't need to like a character to enjoy a book. Does it help? Sure, sometimes. But in general, if a character is interesting enough, I don't care if I think they are the most amazing person ever or a complete and total asshole. There's a difference between characters that are strongly developed with consistent character/personality and are unlikable versus characters that are unlikable due to their poor development and lackluster character. There are numerous book where I found the main character, dull, rude, annoying, or just plain stupid, but the mark of a good author is apparent when people still read and enjoy said book. Sometimes unlikable characters are supposed to be that way, and I still want to read the story. But sometimes they are just plain obnoxious (Falling Kingdoms, I'm looking at you..), and I can't keep going, so I DNF.

One reason I actually enjoy unlikable characters is because it allows us, as readers, to read about a wide variety of human nature. Some people just aren't inherently likable, but that doesn't mean that there is no story to tell. I mean, even many famous figures - Steve Jobs, for instance -- weren't exactly 'likable,' but society as a whole is still generally extremely impressed with him and will continue to read about him and buy products from his company. This brings me to the argument that likable vs unlikable characters also comes down to pure judgment: do we dislike a character and therefore deem their entire story unimportant? Or do we consider reading past and seeing what else is there. Again, this all depends on how the character is written, but I'm writing this with the assumption of strong, well-developed characters and not characters who are unlikable simply because the writing is bad.

Overall, I fall into the category of readers who do not think it matters if a character is likable. If the story is well-written and I'm still finding myself intrigued and not hating the book, then I'll keep on. It's always  nice to read about characters that we can personally connect with, but I rarely try to see myself in characters in books, so perhaps that's why I don't mind so much. I would love to go into more depth on this topic -- maybe with more examples -- but since I don't want to go on for ages, I'll leave it here.


So now I'm curious: what do you think of likable vs. unlikable character? Does it matter to you? Will you read a book even if the character just doesn't work for you?

Never miss a post of bookish fun by subscribing to Forever Lost in Literature!

Discussion: Keeping Track of Short Stories — How Do You Catalog Them in Your Yearly Reading?

One of the course I'm taking for this final quarter of University is focused on reading world literature, and we are doing this through reading a variety of short stories from around the globe. Because I generally like to keep track of my yearly reading (using Goodreads, for instance, as well as my own Excel spreadsheet with more details), this prompted me to consider how short stories should be included in reading lists, as I've yet to determine a good way to include short stories.

If I'm reading a collection of short stories and I read the entire book, then I just count that as one book. But how do you include short, 20-40 page stories? Does it matter? I consider short stories just as important as full-length novels and I always want to keep track of them. It's fairly easy to include in my Excel document, as I include page counts in my tracking, but on apps and websites like Goodreads, it becomes slightly more complicated.

Because of this, I'm curious to find out how you all include short stories in your yearly reading lists, or if you even count them at all. Or, maybe you don't even consider this a problem because you don't keep yearly reading lists. So please leave a comment below with your opinion on this topic! 

Do you combine a certain amount of short stories and then add them together one book? Do you count them individually? Do you even worry about including short stories in your yearly reading? Let me know!

Never miss a post of bookish fun by subscribing to Forever Lost in Literature!