JäsenLacrimaMundi(they/them)

Big fan of Fantasy.

Aside of that I am known for having a rather eclectic taste: I read almost anything, except the books I do not like. I'm polygenreous. And proud of it.

I read, a lot. I write, not nearly as much as I would like to (life too often gets in the way, currently).

I don't dish out 5* willy-nilly; if a book gets 5 it's really exceptional. And if yours 'only' gets 4 or 3 stars it's still a very solid book in my ... well ... book.

My reviews are honest and follow the systematics of:

5* is outstanding.

4* is great.

3* is good but has some minor flaws (aka average).

2* is not that good and might have major flaws.

1* is likely not worth reading, until you have to. But in the end, tastes are different, so please make your own decisions; your mileage may vary.

I will provide reasons for any rating lower than 4* in my review.

I try to be constructive with my criticism and include it in the review in case a book falls short in some ways. Hopefully years of academic involvement (philosophy), as well as proofreading and [lightly] editing academic writings (philosophy, sociology, and psychology) come in handy here. After all, the authors should also get a chance to take something out of those, if they want to.

There more stars I take off from 4* downwards, the more I will elaborate on why exactly that is the case. At least that holds true for indie authors or those published by small publishers.

For well-known traditionally published authors it pretty much depends on what reasons I have to give them a lower than 4* rating. In some cases I might provide reasons, in others I might not. Also, for all the books I read during the previous 40 years of my life: I can remember how much I liked them, but often enough not the exact reasons for why that's the case. So stars alone will have to do for [most of] those.

Last but not least, always remember: de gustibus non est disputandum [one should not pursue disputes over matters of taste].