/writing is pretty helpful. There's also ones for specific genres, like /scifiwriting and /fantasywriters. There's /writingprompts and /writinghub for beginner activities and making connections.

Orcs was so bad I'd consider it, purely to save others from spending the money and wasting 10 minutes of their life. I bought it for $1, and that was too much.

The concept seemed cool, but who thought it was a good idea to have the prose come from the perspective of an orc as well?

There's a couple of books that intend to subvert history and give their readers a false interpretation of facts (that almost certainly stuck with them) in order to push their flimsy plot along, but I wouldn't ban them. But that's the closest I can think of damaging literature, besides the obvious of pushing certain agendas, which authors are entitled to do.

No. The reason they do this is because no one wants to read their original works. So they "adapt" something established, and hope to pull in completely oblivious viewers. There's no passion involved in portraying the work with any form of respect to the source material; it's a platform for their message and to fill out their resume.

The biggest problem with this is that it erodes these IPs to the point that they do not pull in the original crowd any longer, and sours the memory of those things when they were enjoyable.

She's primarily a poet. So you can see how that writing style reflected in her prose, and her need to rephrase the same idea 2 to 3 times to add color. I enjoyed that at first, and found it slightly additive to read, but it started to wear thin about half way through.

The plot was just okay. It was basically a slice of life journal from a specific time period. There are other dystopias that have a stronger message and accomplish more, but this one was rather unique.

The only thing I had issues with was the message. I found it forced to a degree that I suspected that the author might be slightly schizophrenic. And when she draws parallels with biblical instances, that they were taken out of context either through ignorance or likely intentionally, so that she could say "see how evil the patriarchy is?" which only works based on the ignorance of the reader. I found that disingenuous. If you can't find proper resources to add depth to your story, don't lie to your audience, simply don't use them, or find other instances that do work.

I'm referring to the book misleading the reader that the concept of a handmaid giving birth to children for the patriarch. Historically, it was the patriarch's wife that came up with the idea (Sarah and Hagar), which was completely left out, since it didn't fit with the narrative that the author was pushing; that this was a society built up by old men, for old men to objectify young women, and as a warning never to let men go this far again (erroneously).

Since the entire crux of the story revolves around illiteracy, I can see why it's popular in college settings. But no, I don't consider it a good book. It feels closer to propaganda, honestly.

"Now a major motion picture/Netflix series!" with the actor's fact on it.

Around 4. When I read 1 book at a time, I find I read less often and for shorter, and I tend to get annoyed if the book is slow or not interesting. If I can pick what I want to read more it feels easier to sit down and read something. I'm not reading 4 fiction books of the same genre though. Typically, it will be 1 non-fiction and 2 novels of different genres, and 1 short story collection that I barely touch.

Could it be interior monologue from one character, but the author is changing who it is for each scene?

Yeah, it was purely the visualizing that I had trouble with. I have to slow read the author and really dig into the words used to get a sense of atmosphere out of his work. The characters and plot is not difficult. But setting is such a character in cyberpunk stories, that I definitely would feel like I missed something big if I didn't give it that effort.

The root word of problematic is problem. The antonym is solution. Solution in a literary context is revision.

You'd think the literary world would be the last place to strip meaning from words to redefine them for every occasion, but we live in a strange world.

If you're already calling them problematic, then no. The word problematic implies a need for revision. There's nothing objective about a need to change a classic to be in lock step with current ideology.

Rolling your eyes is permitted. There are plenty of fantasy writers I roll my eyes at whenever they attempt to write a sex scene.

Do you need to finish a poop sandwich to warn others not to order the poop sandwich? I hope not.

Depends why you stopped reading it. If it didn't fit your mood, sure. But if it was so bad you quit it and gave it away, then it absolutely deserves a poor rating.

Yes. They were so bad that I could not finish them. That's a statement of quality. Ratings are a statement of quality. That's the whole point. Why would you give someone a free pass if it was so bad you wanted to throw it in the trash? That's like saying if a movie is so bad you walked out on it, you can't call it bad. That's idiotic.

If I realize I stopped reading because I wasn't in the mood for that book, that's different, and I won't. I'll just go back later and read it.

Really, isn't this just people scared to give 1 star ratings? No one is going to chase you down for anything under 3 stars. Scales have a beginning and end for a reason. Use the whole thing. It helps others with their purchases. Not rating something clearly 1 star just helps dupe people into buying more bad books and wasting their time as well.