The Inadequacies of Star Ratings

I’ve started reading books again.

Not that I stopped, exactly, but at some point during my PhD I did stop reading for fun and it was surprisingly hard to get going again. And then I struggled to find time to fit it in between my heavy schedule of pointless doom scrolling, so although I didn’t technically stop my book reading for fun did drop to a tiny trickle.

Now I’ve stopped keeping my phone next to my bed, and fit 30-50 minutes of reading in most days before I crawl out of bed. This is still significantly less than in my youth, but means I’m clearing a reasonable number of books again. I log these, currently on both Goodreads and Storygraph because I’m indecisive.

This logging means I am also giving books star ratings. In my world these ratings are strictly based on how much I enjoyed the book, regardless of things like style or academic worth. 5 stars means I ate it up with a spoon and would love to find time to reread it at least twice. 2 stars was a torment to read but for some reason interesting enough to finish. I don’t think I’ve ever rated something at 1 star – those are DNFs. Life is too short (and there are too many books) to keep reading a book I’m hating, although I do often give them more chances than they deserve.

The inadequacies of this system hit me somewhere 3/4 through the first of Brandon Sanderson’s Mistborn series.

See, here are 3 books that I’ve rated as 5 stars in the last 12 months:

• Olivia Waite’s “The Care and Feeding of Waspish Widows” – a period lesbian romance. Some interesting historical info and bee-keeping, mostly fluff.
• Travis Baldree’s “Legends & Lattes” – a fluffy fantasy number, all about friendship, coffee and pastries.
• Brandon Sanderson’s “The Final Empire” – an epic fantasy with full world building and magic system.

I stand by each of these ratings. I loved reading all of them, and wouldn’t be upset to have to reread any (in fact, “Legends & Lattes” was a reread). But it definitely shows that my 5 stars books are not all created equally. I would say it’s a little bit like comparing a lovely chocolate, to a gorgeous fancy from a good patisserie, to a delicious meal from a 5* restaurant: each is perfect in its place, but one will not work when you’re in the mood for another.

Not that I want to add any complexity to the star rating system. I find it hard enough to pick sometimes as it is. I certainly don’t pick my books based on the star rating alone, but choose using the book blurb and the other reviews to decide what I’m in the mood for. Maybe that’s a skill too. Maybe that explains the odd contrarian rating that pops up.

I am interested how other people view the star rating system though – does everyone rate by enjoyment? Or are there other elements that you think of?