My discomfort sometimes with the more formal review or critique (and this isn't limited to romance) is that so much of what I like or love about some of the books I've read isn't about the craftsmanship but the storytelling. And I get the feeling (more in literary fiction than in genre fiction) that the craft is more important than the storytelling to the critic.

Maybe it's partially conditioning -- that is, what readers/reviewers are conditioned to notice more in a book. In lit fic, the writing is definitely the priority for many readers/reviewers, while in genre fiction, it tends to be the story. I'm not sure one can really thrive without the other, but I also think it takes a certain reader orientation to pay *critical attention* to both in a review. My problem with some of the formal Romance reviewing, I think, is that there's like NO focus on craft. And IMO if more readers commented more on the craft issues then those issues might become more important in the overall editorial and publication process. I agree that it's a drag to read a boring but well-written book, but I downright resent reading a book that is so poorly crafted or copy edited that I can barely get to the story.

Robin