I know I touched on this during my review of "Across the Universe", but fellow book bloggers and especially goodreads.com reviewers, am I missing something? Is it just a faux pas to post a bad review or do you fear publisher retribution (no more ARCs)? If so, I'm sorry about the faux pas, but I just feel like I should be honest on here. I don't want to recommend a book just because I want the publisher to continue giving me advance copies. I value you and your time more than that, and heck, with a little guy at home, I value MY time more than that. I don't want to waste my time reading bad books and trying to write nice things about them simply because I'm afraid that a publisher may not like it. Does this make me a bad book blogger?
Don't get me wrong, I do not want this to become "Michelle's House of Catty Reviews". I will try to never post anything too negative in here and will only review if I'm able to finish the book. I promise to be honest. If you don't like honesty, here's the door. I just had to put down a book after 150 pages and say "Enough's enough." I hate to do that. That's only happen to me on a handful of books in my years as an avid reader. Since I didn't finish it, I decided that I would not post a review here because that's not fair to the author and other readers. I cannot fathom though how well loved this book is on Goodreads.com. Did I read a different book than everyone else? I felt that way about "Angelfire" too. Maybe I'm just too harsh or maybe angel books just aren't my cup of tea? I don't know, but whatever it is, it definitely seems like I'm in the minority. Phew. I just had to get that off my chest!
