Now I ask the question this way because anyone can criticize and therefore a review that criticizes may not always be good. But, to be able to criticize well and believably, one must have some type of knowledge. In addition, we are all fallible humans and therefore there can hardly be any novel that would be "perfect" and averse to criticism. So, criticism could technically be directed at anything.
On the other hand, is it a crime to refuse to find fault if the book is so good that the criticisms would just be pedantic? Do we feel we have to find fault to show that we are knowledgeable and can be trusted? Do readers feel this same way?
Personally, I feel that I respect a review that isn't afraid to criticize a work. Not every novel is for everyone. If a blogger continued to berate anything and everything, then I would think they are trying too hard to find fault. It's a thin line, one that I'm sure gets crossed constantly. I (yes, even I) have been known to give a fully positive review, but I have also given some negative ones. Not that I'm saying this about myself, but should we trust a review more if it is purely positive as long as we know the blogger is willing to give a negative review?
It's almost like standing on the other side of the fence. It's hard to give a negative review full of criticism when everyone finds it positive, but I think it's also hard to give a positive review when everyone finds it negative and then to stand by it.
Yep, that's where I brought it, full circle. Anyway, thanks for baring with my ramblings. It's late and I'm sure I'll wake up in the morning thinking, what the heck was I talking about?!?!
