[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Home]
4Archive logo
Sites similar to Rotten Tomatoes/Metacritic...
If images are not shown try to refresh the page. If you like this website, please disable any AdBlock software!

You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature

Thread replies: 25
Thread images: 1
File: goldenage.png (45 KB, 96x177) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
goldenage.png
45 KB, 96x177
Are there any good websites that catalog professional reviews of literary works? The best/only one I know of is the Complete Review (www.complete-review.com/maindex/maindex.html), but while their selection of fiction is very good if incomprehensive, their poetry section is lacking horribly (http://www.complete-review.com/maindex/poetry.htm). Are there any other options? Not interested in sites that focus on pop/genre lit, ofc.
>>
>>7562181
Goodreads.
>>
>>7562181
Also I'm pretty sure CR only includes things that people who write for the site have read.
>>
>>7562186
That's the IMDB of books. I want the Rotten Tomatoes/Metacritic
>>
Nothing?
>>
>>7562360

I don't think that literary reviewing has the same critical mass or general public interest that movie reviewing does (there's no real history of it on TV for example). And of course much of the reviewing that does exist is of pop lit. The only review aggregator I can think of is the one you mention.
>>
>>7562181
source?
>>
>>7562412
For what?
>>
>>7562419
op's image
>>
>>7562420
It's from a Mannerist-era painting called The Golden Age by Jacopo Zucchi
>>
It's kind of pointless for literature.

If it's hundreds of years old and still being publishing then it's influential enough, or good enough to be read.

If not, then you probably can't read it anyway.

Why would you need a critical score of Homer for example? What would be the point?
>>
>>7562427
noice
>>
>>7562435
Complete Review mostly does literature first published in English within the past few decades, they do very few classics.

>>7562440
You're welcome.
>>
,
>>
>>7562674
o;__;o
>>
>>7562693
who the fuck r u
https://warosu.org/lit/?task=search2&search_tripcode=!!BIK5eIhFZb2
>>
5984g7u
>>
>>7562181

I think you're looking for something like Novelist but that's behind a paywall unless your university/local library subscribe to it.

Anything in particular you're looking for?
>>
>>7563272
I described what I'm looking for in the OP. I'm not looking for any particular book. I'm definitely not looking for a service you have to pay for
>>
>>7562181

the thing is that "rotten tomatoes" and "metacritic" are good for things that are easily consumed and where consensus is more important than detailed examination.

With poetry (which you seem to want something like this for) there is no point in such a system. Most "expert reviewers" would hate any sort of number system forced on the system. It turns literature into a status symbol -- "which poems did you rate five stars? whoa, a Shelley poem? plebbbb" -- when in reality, reading, especially reading poetry, is a solitary event and many great poems can only be quantified by the reader. Nobody who actually reads poetry would want to put a star rating on their favorite (or least favorite) collections. Let alone favorite poems.

So really, what you're asking for is a mass-consumption oriented rating system tailor-made for a non-mass-consumption endeavor.

Why?
>>
>>7563628
I don't really care about the numbers, I just want a site that collects reviews and gives a very general critical consensus, basically exactly what the Complete Review does
>>
>>7563708
i mean stuff like the avengers and so on have good reviews on rotten tomatoes despite being utter shit so it really doesn't mean shit.
>>
>>7563708
How many publications still review books? Couldn't you just go to like 4 websites and have a consensus
>>
>>7563730
For popular movies, you should always look at the negative reviews, and in any case, reviews still give you a good idea of what you're going to get.

>>7563736
Dozens at least.
>>
whew just caught ya before you fell into the abyss
Thread replies: 25
Thread images: 1
Thread DB ID: 411423



[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.