Judging the Source and IM's

[Aster]

I have a question about what type is likely to do this (or IM's is responsible):

I sometimes see reviews where people are not actually reviewing something, but judging the source. For example, there is this author (Cassandra Clare) and I don't know exactly what happened, but from what I had gathered from what I did see, she was a Harry Potter fan fiction writer before she started writing books (Mortal Instruments). Evidently she was accused of using other people's stories as her own (plagiarism) from her fan fiction. Some people have pretty strong negative reactions against her for this. So some popular bloggers that I follow didn't even READ her books before giving her a one star on some widely used sites. Some rated her books one star before her books were even released.

I was pretty disappointed in these bloggers for rating something before they even READ it because of ill feelings towards the author for things she has done in the past. I think they really should at least read the book first or not review the book at all. To me it seems unprofessional and childish. It really made me think about unfollowing them because I really don't want to support people doing this.

Another complaint they had against Clare was that her Mortal Instruments characters were too similar to Harry Potter ones. Jace like Draco and Clary like Ginny. Obviously Clare is an HP enthusiastic since she wrote HP fan fiction. There are fairytale retellings all the time, so I don't see how it's much different. I don't feel like there are any actually new stories at all, personally, and that it's like it's all bits of a puzzle that are rearranged. I think Mortal Instruments is different enough from HP that it's not a problem and they are just using this as an opportunity to rag on her some more. If people are willing to want to read this kind of stuff, and it's different enough, what's the problem?

I see the same things happen with books like Mein Kampf. People that haven't even read it will just give it one star. Like some will write, 'I will never read this.', with a one star attached. It just really gets under my skin when people review things in this way. I personally own it and plan on reading it, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. I mainly want to read it for curiosities sake. I will pretty much read anything, and this perspective is a bit foreign to me..and frustrating.

So what type would be the most likely to do this, or what information elements do you think are involved here? Are there certain books you won't read? Will you read about anything? And why?

[Exodus]

The main conflict here seems to be between harshness and judgment ( / ) vs. openmindedness ().

[Mori]

The main conflict here seems to be between harshness and judgment ( / ) vs. openmindedness ().

Is it Se is strong and conscious, while Ni is weak? I have this understanding that Ni in ego block will be less inclined to make sharp judgment since their Ne is still strong even though unconscious.

[Pookie]

Its too broad and widespread to be type related. Its virtue signaling. The appropriate disgust would be that they cant enjoy it because the copying or whatever distracts and leaves a bad taste in their mouth. But the act of a 1 star review, is an act of attention seeking. "My name is Pookie, and I give Mein Kampf 1 star, because I think ****** was bad. Im one of these people, and I want you to see me that way." Its looking for affirmation in others. The need to broadcast anything less like that is a human weakness that transcends all types.

[Exodus]

Is it Se is strong and conscious, while Ni is weak? I have this understanding that Ni in ego block will be less inclined to make sharp judgment since their Ne is still strong even though unconscious.

That's generally true about -5 but -6 types can be quite harsh. It simply depends on how much is expressed.

[golden]

The kinds of reviews you're talking about, made possible mainly by the Internet when traditionally reviews were made only by people who had read a book, can be seen as a form of protest or boycott of a product, like the Amazon.com reviews of Ivanka Trump products that have been created as political statements.

Are you bothered by things like boycotts or protests? Or by the disorder or chaos of people hijacking a review space to make some kind of statement about an issue?

Or is it simply that you think authors deserve a chance to be heard?

Iow, I'm trying to ascertain the nature of your dislike of this. I think it might be worthwhile for someone to read Mein Kampf, for example, as it's a significant historical document, but I don't think that one-star reviews will be the deciding factor in whether someone picks it up.
@thehotelambush spoke of this as possibly having to do with open-mindedness, but I'm not convinced, since I see openness to the author, but not to the point of view of the detractors.

My opinion is more like this: people have the right to produce books, and people have the right to say no to the content, but also the entire decision to make the book, the publisher, the store selling it, the author--pretty much anything they want to object to, that's their prerogative. I spend a fair amount of time considering how to encourage civil discourse online, and how to discourage toxic discourse, but for me, people using a review space to comment on the context surrounding a publication -- not just its contents -- or other product is not inherently bad.

[golden]

It probably depends on the boycotts/protests and why they are doing it, @goldenbane. Sometimes I'm bothered by things that I myself have no logical reasoning for, but just purely a gut reaction. Sometimes it's difficult to figure out exactly why it bothers me. TBH, I don't really consider it unless someone asks, I just go with it. Maybe I felt like it was the book being reviewed, and not the person, and that's why it bothered me. Like I don't want their opinion of the author to interfere with their opinion of the book. I'd prefer for it be to more 'objective'? And seperated. Idk. It's not that I don't respect their opinion, and I think it would be much worse if they weren't allowed to have an opinion, but it is automatic for me to sift through the opinions of those I do and don't agree with/find irritating, and I can really let it start bothering me in some cases. I agree about the opendmindeness. I thought of this too. It is definitely closed-minded my part in some way or another....

Thank you for your opinion on the matter. It did make me think about this a little differently.

I find it interesting that you say you automatically "sift through the opinions of those I do and don't agree with/find irritating, and I can really let it start bothering me in some cases." I guess this is something most people do; it's a form of pattern matching. Maybe not everyone does it to the same degree, though.

I definitely could find myself getting annoyed with the extra effort involved in sifting through a review space with comments that don't tell me what I want to know.

[The Exception]

I can relate alot to @Blue said. I pride myself on keeping an open mind about things, to give them a chance because often, things are not what they seem to be on the surface. It doesn't mean I will necessarily like it but I like to at least find out for myself where I stand on it and try to at least understand the perspective of the author.

I also find that I'm bothered when people end up overly categorical in their judgements because of one bad experience which isn't even reflective of the whole.

For example, my ESI grandmother was very much like that. She went to a Chinese restaurant once, didn't like the food and dismissed the whole cuisine. Not to mention that what she sampled was only a couple of dishes, far from an entire cuisine. Also, different restaurants cook things differently and she very well could have had the same dish at a different place with a far better experience.

She does the same with entertainment too. Dismisses an entire genre based on one book, movie, etc. she observed. When it's nowhere near reflective of the whole thing.