Recently, I’ve had several books that I did not finish, I didn’t review them because I’m stuck between whether it’s right or wrong to review books you haven’t finished. For me, I don’t like to review a book if it hasn’t been read completely, because I simply don’t know if it does get any better, or how it ends. Sometimes a book can completely redeem itself, but I wouldn’t know.
If you’re reading a book for review, I think it’s important to try and finish it so that your review is informed and you can criticise it with confidence. I understand though that some books are so bad that people just have to write a DNF (did not finish) review. I know quite a few people that do review books they DNF, they state why they didn’t finish it and review it based on what they did read. The book bloggers I know do give the book a good chance. I think DNF reviews are good because when you are so honest your readership tend to respect that honesty. Also, if you are upfront about not finishing a book and it does get better the book blogging community can give their opinions on the book and let you know if you should give the book another chance.
The thing that baffles me the most is when I see reviews on Amazon that state they didn’t read the book at all. Why on earth are they leaving a review then?
What do you think? Do you review books that you did not finish? Is it fair to the author?