Reviews, again

When posting book reviews, can they all be a 4 or 5? I mean really. Lets think about this. Is EVERY author that honed in their craft and experienced with the subject matter to churn out perfect or near perfect books. It just seems impossible to me.

You have heard my rants on this topic before. I gave someone a 3.5 and they were upset. I thought it was a good review. On the other hand, I have purchased book rated 4 and 5 only to sit there in utter boredom, pushing through the dense read, adamant that I am going to complete it, if only to get my money's worth.

What is the standard. Is the English proper? Was there a plot at all? What about character development, plot consistency, writing credibility, use of creativity, etc...

To add insult to injury, how can the reviewer rate a book a 5 when her review is filled with typos, grammatically incorrect references and poor language. Similarly, what about the book reviewer who reveals the entire plot of the book, eliminating the need for the reader to buy it. If this reviewer grants it a 5, I tend to be a little bit suspect.

I have a poor review that I am drafting for a new writer. And I feel bad about it. Not the review, because I think I am being as fair as possible. But bad because she is going to be upset about a less than 5 rating, even though it is a less than 5 book. And its unfair to her because her reviewer (me) actually CARES about literature and maintaining some basic standards in written work and will not award a 5 because I have been paid to review the book or am a home girl. So, while her book is probably equivalent to some other currently rated 4 or 5, I am giving it a 3 or 3.5, because, in good conscious, I can't give it any higher. I wouldn't want the reader to spend their money without knowing the truth. That the action was predictable, the sex boring and more dry, the plot meaningless. Murder without remorse, sex without consequence, drugs without a price, partying without a burnout, a book with no layers, levels or emotions. Isn't that what separates a "person who just wrote a book," from an author. And shouldn't the author be given a fair opportunity to identify the short comings in her efforts before devoting resources promoting the book?

Either way, I am fighting the give it a 4 or 5 and one paragraph saying nothing review. I read one today that said "after getting through the beginning of this book, it was a great read." Huh? If you had to "get through" it, like it was a densely populated forest, then the book couldn't have been a 5 (which is what it was rated). I am just tired of it. Thinking of instituting a rating system so reviews can have a valid meaning and actually serve as a guide, instead of a way for authors and soon to be authors to pat each other on the back and build support for their own upcoming releases.