Confession: my to-read pile is ginormous. Offensive, even. And it only keeps getting bigger. *face palm*
While looking at said to-read pile the other day, I realized I have a healthy balance of genres, all targeted for a YA audience. BUT I also noticed that some books I'd been hearing about for months, while others... not so much.
I started thinking about a word that gets thrown around a lot in the blogosphere: hype. Particularly, its effect on book sales and reviews. You know, the stuff people are always worried about?
Well... wanna know a secret? *waves forward* Books will be good if they're good.
Whether they're hyped about or not won't affect the quality of the author's words. It just means his or her sales will *probably* leave people's jaws on the floor. Or at least hanging inches away from it. :D
I don't know about you, but I get really upset when book reviewers/bloggers/readers/whoeverhasaccesstotheInternet start mouthing off against a book because it's been hyped about. Not because he or she read said book and didn't enjoy it for legit reasons. Why would I trust someone who hasn't even done their research? Who brushes off a book simply because the majority likes it? *shakes head* That's a huge no-no to me.
Then there's the opposite--those who ignore works of lesser known authors simply because they're not on the NYT Best-selling list. Because bookstores don't have them placed front and center, easy to find as soon as you walk in. Because nobody's fighting over film rights and blowing up screenwriters' phones for the movie adaptation.
I have one question for both groups: seriously?
Like I said, books are good if they're good. Hype does not equal quality, nor do hyped-about books suck. At least, not to me.
Now fess up: are you easily swayed by hype when purchasing books? Or do you mix it up with un-hyped-about ones?