How do you determine the rating of a book you have read? In theory, it is quite easy. A great book gets five stars, a mediocre book three stars and if the book was a complete waste of timel it gets one star. One of the first things I did when I started this blog was creating a rating key, detailing the meaning of each rating from one to five stars, so my readers would know what I pay attention to in a book and how I decide on a rating. I quickly realised, however, that describing the meaning of a star-rating is not as easy as I first thought. Because in reality, me giving two books the same rating doesn’t necessarily mean they are comparable in “quality”.

In other words: If I had a great time reading a book and fell in love with its characters, I will rate the book five stars, no questions asked. However, does that mean that the book is perfect in my eyes? Not necessarily. But even if the book has obvious flaws such as poor world-building or an unoriginal plot, if the book managed to transport me into another world and made me forget I was reading, why shouldn’t it deserve a high rating? I might deduct half a star for major flaws, but usually anything that didn’t negatively impact my reading experience will not be taken into account in the rating. In the review, I will of course mention the flaws I noticed so any potential readers are aware of them.

At the same time, the opposite may be the case. I might read a book which, theoretically, was perfect. Multi-dimensional characters, original plot, an interesting setting and beautiful writing. Only did I not form an emotional connection to the characters and wasn’t fully immersed in the story. I would still give this book five stars because the author crafted a great story. Once again, I might deduct half a star to indicate that it is not a new favourite book in the way that the story will stay with me or had an impact on me, but overall I would consider it a wonderful book. The same goes for books I read outside my preferred genres. I most likely won’t enjoy them as much, but it is not the book’s fault if I don’t like the genre and it would be pointless to give a bad rating to a book for being exactly what it was supposed to be. (While I am at it, just a little reminder that it is amazing to read outside your preferred genres or age-group, but please keep in mind who this book was written for when rating it. Especially leaving a bad rating on websites like Amazon or Goodreads can negatively impact sales, because some people are hesitant or refuse to buy books that do not have a high average rating. So if you didn’t like a fantasy book because it had too many fantasy elements or a YA book because it didn’t include enough mature content, maybe consider not posting the review)

Overall, I often find it difficult to find a good balance when rating books. If I only gave five stars to books that actually managed to make me forget I was reading and stayed with me long after I finished reading them, I would be stuck with nine books from two different series… with not much hope to add more books to that list in the near future (apart from other books from those series). On the other hand, sometimes I feel as though I am rating too many books 4.5 stars or above (by the way, 4.5 stars is usually my standard rating for: great book theoretically, but unfortunately I didn’t form an emotional connection to the characters) and thus the books I truly loved and that impacted me don’t stand out enough.

I have tried doing traditional ratings and I have tried not doing ratings at all, but both hasn’t really worked for me. For now, I guess I will go back to star ratings but I will probably indicate whether the rating is a result of my emotional experience with the book, my theoretical observations of the book’s qualities and flaws or a mixture of both. Or maybe I will do a star rating and a heart rating for my theoretical observations and my emotional experience respectively… we’ll see.

What are your thoughts on this topic? Do you ever struggle to determine which rating to give a book?