Potent Potables

I don't like writing bad book reviews. (That's a lie. I do, but I rarely post them b/c I feel bad for the authors.) But I love the feeling of vindication when books I thought were drivel get bad reviews.

As a writer and a book publicist, I should hate bad reviews. And when they're written about books I love, or am working on, I do hate them and have been known to say "Why do newspapers/magazines bother printing bad reviews? Why not only focus on books that are worthy of the space?" And then I read something that, I think, never should have been published. And I say to myself, "Gee, I wish someone had warned me!" (Ok, I don't say "Gee" but I'm trying to keep this blog PG. I mean, I write for teens for Pete's sake!)

What do you think, fair readers? Do you think reviewers should focus on books they like and leave the crap to gather dust on shelves and get remaindered due to lack of publicity? Or do you want to be forewarned not to waste your time even though it's possible you might disagree with that reviewer and never read a book that could actually be quite worthy?