And I'm lazy.
I mean, think about it. Me actually writing 125+ reviews each year? Not gonna happen. Plus, not every book I read is worth writing about. I find it hard enough coming up with the right words to describe a good book let alone one that is merely mediocre; I mean how many ways can you say something is just okay? So I tend to skip reviewing the so-so reads. But I have to admit, even some books that are really good don't always inspire me to pen a post.
(Did I mention that I'm lazy?)
I probably should do more posts about the books that weren't worth finishing, but I don't like dwelling on the negative. And do you really want to read about a bunch of books that I either didn't like, or didn't finish? Maybe it would be different if I were clever and had a talent for humorous harangues, but sadly I'm not that funny. (Although I sometimes wish I were!) Besides, one of the main reasons I started blogging about books was to help me better remember the plots of the good reads, not all the failures and weaknesses of the bad ones.
So, I guess for the 75 or so books that I do end up reviewing each year, I'll stick with the ones I loved. Or at least liked. Along with those others where the review just seems to write itself. Because blogging shouldn't feel like work. And neither should chatting about books.