I wrote an essay on this not too long ago because reviewers can't show whether they'll reveal no, minor or major details of the plot or everything of the plot. Movie reviewers can. I'd like to know if newbies and veterans alike would find that button helpful.

Jan

I haven't posted a movie review yet, but I have noticed that feature in reading movie reviews. I think it would keep some book reviewers out of trouble.

Admittedly, I'm more interested in character-driven than in plot-driven books (and movies), but
(1) no one ever complains that character development is revealed in reviews
(2) the ratio of reviews of nonfictio to fiction books is significantly higher than the ratio of documentaries to other kinds of feature films.

Moreover, I think automatic objection to discussing the plots of canonical works of fiction (e.g., the Illiad or Pride and Prejudice) is absurd.

Thus, I do not think such a field should be added. Reviewers can (and do!) set off "spoiler alerts" within reviews when it THEY think it is needed. The set of nonsensical categories in movie reviews are NOT something to emulate in books!

I have to agree with Stephen. I just started writing Star Trek: DS9 reviews, and I've found that most of the "options" we're given don't really apply to them. "Suspense factor?" What if it's a character episode?

As for spoilers themselves, Stephen's got a good point that the spoiler alert wouldn't affect a great number of the books. What we need is more encouragement to avoid giving spoilers or to mark them off as separate in the review itself. As one of the advisors, I know I do this if I think too much has been given away without adequate warning.

Dave

The problem with such "buttons" is that they are open to interpretation. What one person deems "a little", another person may deem "lots".

 There've been plenty of folk who just write a long plot summary and think that's a review. Not so. The converse is true, where people avoid plot summaries as "they don't want to give away the plot." Also not good.

Point being, those buttons would be secondary. Most reviewers I know wouldn't use 'em anyway. I wouldn't. The only people they might help would be newbies, and they get plenty of help in their first few comment sections...

Cheers,

SL

Anyone who doesn't know who won the Great War to begin with won't be reading my stuff anyway (I devoutly hope).

Still, I think in SOME categories a 'Spoiler Alert,' not necessarily detailed as to level, might be advisable. Mysteries come to mind, ahem.

I would rather trust reviewers than to have boxes that must be filled out with each review.

The boxes never quite accurately describe exactly what I want to say. Most of our book reviewers are pretty literate and are able to say exactly what they want to say. I can usually tell by the first sentence of a paragraph whether there is going to be what I consider a spoiler and I stop reading.

Also, people have different definitions as to what a spoiler is. I know you thought I was including a spoiler when I said a character was dead--something that was revealed on the first page of the play and was a central piece of information to the entire rest of the plot and any discussion of the themes. We have a difference of opinion. At that point, I think we need to let people write the reviews they want and let readers stay away from those reviewers whom they think will spoil things for them.

And the button isn't really necessary. Book reviewers could add that text to their review if they really felt it necessary.

 Bridgette, I didn't catch that it was revealed on the first page and had reread it, but I know I don't predict how much a book reviewer will reveal of the plot from the first sentence or until I'm reading the summary. Newbies who don't know our reviewers will not know. I'm not saying everyone needs to use the button, but that it should be an option. Of course the minor and major details differentiation is a matter of opinion. That doesn't mean using the button isn't helpful!

I'm thinking of how the button is most helpful for newbies in writing and us reading them, for they don't know to add spoiler alerts. It makes the site more user-friendly and encourages newbies to review books.

Jan

Jan:

I'm not even realy sure how useful the button in question is in the movies category. For instance, I once had to put "reveals everything about the plot" on a film... because it had no plot!!. Okay that's an extreme example, but 99% of people are going to choose "reveals some" or "reveals most" of the plot. Having read many movie reviews, however, I don't feel that more than about 35-40% of the alleged amount of plot revealed is accurate in any place.

I cansee why you suggested the idea, but I'd tend to think it would be a waste of time. Very few writers reveal the whole plot anyway, and those who do are quickly identified. Also newbies can count on someone (usually Tom, let's face it - wh, incidentally, reads more fiction reviews than he's willing to admit) letting them know if they've given away too much of the plot - and the "too much" mark varies with each reader anyway. I also tend to favour the method of revealing the premise rather than the actual plot.

Well, there's my two cents' worth.

CaptainD

I'm sure it was an oversight, Dave... :-P

Actually Tom says he normally comments on books where he thinks the writers need a bit of help to improve... erm... and he still leaves them on mine quite often... :-O

CaptainAlarmed

I tend to agree with the arguments that we don't need a Spoiler button. Anyone who is deeply concerned about this is free to type her review with a proviso at the start saying she's revealing practically everything about the plot, if she feels the ethical obligation to do so.

On death: generally I will avoid telling you who died in, let's say, the final 3/4 of the book. (Anybody who died in the first 1/4 was probably the obligatory First Corpse in a murder mystery, or otherwise Clearly Meant to Be Expendable, and could probably be spotted as such if you actually read the first few chapters yourself.)

There are exceptions. To paraphrase Stephen Murray, if I were writing a review of a printed edition of Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" or a movie adapting that play, I would not feel ashamed of myself when I told people that Romeo and Juliet are both dead by the end of the play. After all, I had known how it ended for years before I was ever required to read the play in high school English.

(Several years ago, when "Titanic" was setting box office records, I saw a hilarious cartoon reprinted in Newsweek. Bunch of people lined to buy tickets to "Titanic." One customer is saying to a friend, "I hear the special effects when the ship sinks are really fantastic!" Another customer overhears and says indignantly, "The ship sinks? Thanks for RUINING the ending!")

Another exception came a few years ago when I posted a review of a trade paperback collection of a comic book storyline about the death of Superman. The book title was: "The Death of Superman." With that in mind, I didn't feel too guilty about telling my readers that in the final scene of the material collected in the book, Superman died. I figured the title kinda gave that away at the very start. (Also, it helped that the material in that book was never intended to be taken as a complete story the way a novel by Charles Dickens might be a complete story. It was basically just the first installment of a very long epic that has been reprinted as a "trilogy," so I wasn't so much describing the "ending" as describing the "setup" for a much longer story of which this was just the first little piece.)

On the other hand, when the Daredevil movie came out almost two years ago, I felt I jumped through hoops in my review to avoid telling my readers that the hero's girlfriend (apparently) died in battle with an assassin toward the end of the movie. I seem to recall that some reviewers were not so restrained.