So, I’ve been reading lots lately and subsequently posting a bunch too. Unfortunately, I like to try to “save up” my reviews until they’re clever and/or funny, but just haven’t been feeling it. So, I’ve been wrestling with the merits of posting only when I have something witty to say vs. posting every time I finish a book.

It just seems most of what I’m reading hasn’t been outstanding enough one way or the other to get the creative juices flowing. (I was also struggling with the fact that all my posts for a while were honest, but extremely negative. I mean, I don’t want to be a book basher.) Yet, I still feel an almost immediate need to discuss what I’ve read even if it is only with my sister and the handful of other people who read this blog… After all, I’ve invested so much time reading whatever that I feel I’ve somehow failed if I don’t post something. And lately, if I wait to post only about the stuff I love…well, I might as well give up blogging altogether.

So, this begs the question…

Which makes a book (review) blog better: clever, infrequent posts or so-so, more routine ones? I think I tend to prefer the first, at least in the blogs I read, yet I tend toward the other end in practice…(Kelley and I have had this discussion before and never came to a clear decision, although I’m pretty sure she’d go with the first category too.)  Alas, as I’m still undecided, but erring on the side that I MIGHT need to remember my initial reactions about the-most-ridiculously-titled-book-I’ve-ever-read someday…here goes with another BORING entry.