At Central Booking and Different Reviewing Strokes for Different Reviewing Folks (or Something Very Like That)

I totally missed reporting on the launch of At Central Booking yesterday, which is sort of bizarre since I contributed -- somewhat -- to the initial effort. That is, Sandra told me a few weeks ago she was asking several reviewers how they felt about a sort of sliding scale for reviews. Here’s what she asked:

Should there be different reviewing criteria for the different subgenres? Within crime fiction, for example, some people do not feel any book classified a thriller needs to be realistic. Thriller protagonists are allowed to display superhero-like qualities - an ability to go for days without sleeping or eating, etc, and still defeat their adversaries. Should books be reviewed differently based on subgenre? And if we review books this way, what of cross genre books? Are there any potentially disastrous consequences of applying different reviewing criteria?

There are links to all the answers -- plus Sandra’s whole question -- here. Here’s part of what I replied:

I find the question itself somewhat alarming. Different criteria for different parts of the genre? To me that implies a contest rather than a review. As though we are judging sponge cakes at a county fair: the thickest icing, the most yellow flesh, the moistest crumb.

Meanwhile, The Rap Sheet reported on both the launch of At Central Booking as well as the winners of the inaugural Spinetingler Awards here. At Central Booking itself is here.