Blogs exist to point things out, spur conversation, and build community. So writing a traditional review for an online audience can be counterproductive, because—to put it crudely—that kind of review “ends”. It doesn’t invite response (unless it’s particularly controversial in tone, I guess). That’s why lit blogs with a lot of commentage and committed readerships are the ones that more or less say, So and so just won this prestigious award, I think it’s great, but what do you guys think about her winning and what do you think about awards in general? There’s the temptation amongst booklovers to sound brilliant in their own writing, but potential commenters don’t want brilliance . . . they want to feel invited to contribute.

There’s a good discussion about this issue on the blog Torque Control.

I read reviews not just to find new books for myself but to see if the experience of reading the book somehow changed the reviewer’s perspective on life or some aspect of life. I write book reviews (I just started, with only half a dozen under my belt) for the same reason. Some of the best reviewers (Nick Hornby, for one) use books as a jumping off point to talk about any number of non-literary topics.

That being said, my own reviews, which appear on my personal site listed above, as well as on the much more popular Burnside Writers Collective, almost never get comments.