It is important to consider when writing a review.
Why are the annotations to books so often poorly written?
To begin with, it is worthwhile to clarify: between the annotation and the review is about the same connection as between the annotation and aeronautics. The book abstract is written according to special rules, its purpose is not to review, but to describe the book, conditionally, for 500 characters. How well this is obtained from the editor is a question to the editor. I do not notice the tendencies of the deterioration of the book annotations, because to me, as a reader, a much more complete picture of the book gives a table of contents – this, of course, applies only to non-fiction books.
What should I do if I do not like the book?
Many critics would have asked on the contrary – what if the book was liked? Thunder is something much easier than praising. But we still do not make a list of “my favorite cats, oh, sorry, little books,” but the compilation of references to the most important part of intellectual activity of mankind. It’s important not to “like / dislike”, but do you have anything to say about this.
As for the passion that is admissible in the review, it depends on the image of the author you are creating, from your own lyrical hero. But we must bear in mind that weighing and sobriety do not bother, but passion, emotionality and spikes with arms get bored by the hand and, in order to get the reader to put up with such an “emotional” self, one must offer much more than this passion, and, in principle , more than the one who is engaged simply in quiet analysis of the text.
In which cases would you advise you to abandon the offer to write a review of a particular book?
If you do not consider it worthy of a conversation – or even an excuse for some public generalizations (which in itself is not a very high critical genre). In general, do not engage in what you frankly disgusts, and this applies not only to literary and journalistic work.