The given rating is the reflection of the reader's like or dislike.

I noticed this statement on a forum of a writers group and it made me sit up and take notice. I understand how an author would perceive it as being true, especially if they spend time on Amazon. If a published book is allowed to be rated by the public, as on Amazon, they do rate on how well they liked it. But in a writing group, the rate should be used only to show the amount of work left to do. If the piece is finished and well written, the rate shows it. Of course, this is subjective to each readers likes, and that makes the statement true, regretfully. Whether the reviewer liked or disliked it shouldnt be a factor. Its pleasant to read something we like, but if we review and rate, we should be able to read most anything and be objective and fair.

There is an abyss separating drafts from published work. For experienced writers, it might be no larger than a chink that can be stepped over, in which case the rate will be higher. But, beginning writers often have a canyon to cross. They see the beautifully colored covers of published books lining the cliff across the way and they want to jump across with one draft. Theyre impatient to get there and wonder why they have to work so hard stumbling on loose gravel and climbing over boulders when that other guy didnt appear to. They believe the rates are weights holding them back and making the journey tougher than it has to be. Chances are, the other guy began in exactly the same place.

If accompanied by a constructive review, the stars are intended to shine light on the obstacles ahead and show him an easier way to get to the top of the far cliff. If he takes advantage of the comments, it will make his trip smoother; but if he spends his time sitting on a rock bewailing another rewrite, hell never make it. High stars do not make the writing good, nor do low stars make it bad. They only shine.

Harriet Silkwood
Writes for http://www.Writing.Com/authors/storytime