I don't know where to put this

[Bassy]

I am wanting to let out a little rant about this book review. I was reading reviews about Three Sisters, Three Queens by Phillipa Gregory, a book I am currently reading. I saw a review about the Protagonist, and not a good review. It basically said that the reader didn't like the character that she was self-centered. But what is the big deal for this to be given a bad rating?

A question came to mind, why do people expect the perfect character? Any character should have some personality. She is telling the story in the beginning at 12 years old. 12 year old are gonna be jealous like she is in the book. I don't get the big deal. I like how Gregory gave the main character a personality, something not expected for readers to picture.

[Gingerale]

so...do you recommend we read this book? And why or why not?

[galled]

This is, as you've pointed out, silly. What makes a story, or in this case character, interesting is change--and the more extreme the change, the more dramatic/interesting it is. So to start a character off as good/perfect/fill in the blank, you have nowhere to go but down towards negative characteristics. So it naturally makes sense to start on the bad end and end up on the good end--with caveats of course.

That said, it can be taken to extremes or ignored out of ignorance (where you have unlikable characters--a valid criticism--"why am I reading this because I hate everyone in the book?!").

However, having survived savaging by internet critics (although I've been fortunate to receive more praise overall in total and from professional reviews) I believe I can offer some perspective:

[+] SPOILER

1. Everyone has an opinion, but not all are justifiable in regards to a critique, either or, on a basis of fact or reasoning. It seems our society has morphed over the years to oversensitivity where any slight discomfort is justifiable as an offense. (Completely based on emotion regardless of whether justifiable/traceable back to the work or not.) Today, if you're offended or feel anything one iota that is not peachy, people feel it is their duty to voice their displeasure. Of course, the hypocritical part is by their action are offending others--but that has no bearing on anything... but I digress on this point

2. As wonderful as the internet is giving voices to the masses, many don't know what they're talking about, don't have a broader understanding of art (fill in the blank) as a basis of critique and produce baseless criticism, others just join the troll bandwagon. It seems to be a thing to bash things--my guess is it makes them feel cool or they have power or something. Overall I will say that my observations are that the internet has rushed towards negativity especially in the last few years.

3. Everyone would do well to take what they read (especially on the internet, from regular folk and professional media) with a large dose of skepticism. If it doesn't ring true, it probably isn't and it isn't worth the brain power fretting over it. The phrase "ignore the trolls" seems to fit. They may not have intended to be a troll, the way to handle it remains the same. Of course, if you feel strongly about it, you can post well thought out critiques as a counterpoint.

[Lemon Cheesecake]

change this to a book review title maybe? Or give it a name like those movie critics who used to review movies - Siskel and Eibert was it?

[Polaris]

Well, you can't always please everyone unfortunately :/
Maybe the critic really prioritized what they felt was a "good character" when rating the book, so the lack of what they saw as a "good character" was what made them give the book a bad review. Not everyone likes Edgar Allen Poe's writings and not everyone enjoys J.K. Rowling's works, but that hasn't stopped them from rising to fame and becoming names forever remembered. It's all perspective really, though sometimes some perspectives are heavily misguided

Like galled said, everyone has an opinion and critique is natural to the learning experience but not all the opinions and critiques given should be listened to (because they might just be trolls or people who don't know what they're talking about). To each his own, I guess?

TL;DR Don't let a bad review stop you from reading a book. Read it for yourself and let yourself determine whether or not it's a "good book!"

BONUS: I came across this video about a book review one day that I found absolutely hilarious! The book, if you google it, has 4 star reviews but the youtuber reviewing called it the "worst book" she'd "ever read."

[Bassy]

I'm gonna keep reading it, I was just curious. I can see how the character is that way, but it's only early on in the book so far, she is 12. Once she starts to be Queen, that's when the maturity kicks in. Though I have no idea how far she got, she mentions the age of 12.

It may be the way she worded it. I'm not really angry about it. I was thinking what characteristics should every main character have. I am not trying to say this is a complaining tone, I really am not all-the-way angry about this. I was basically thinking that it's more interesting on how people give the main character a bit of a personality. Trying to refute to her comment (i guess)I feel really awkward right now...

I was kinda wanting to see your thoughts on if main characters don't have to be goody little two shoes all the time.
I wonder if there are any books that has the villain as the main character... interesting PoV.