Where’s Your Never-Buy Line?

Every now and again, readers will interact with authors online and kerfuffles ensue. I know, it’s so rare, but it happens. No, really.

And sometimes in the course of these festive occasions, you’ll see commentary from a reader who is so incensed, so horrified by what an author has written that there is Epic Flounce and a vow to never read or buy that author’s books again!

(Pretend there was a really impressive echo feature on that last sentence, kthx.)

I usually blink at these flounces because it takes a LOT for me to reach a point where I am unable to see past my impression of an author to the point where my reaction interferes with my reading that author’s book. And yet many, many readers online have vowed publicly to never spend another penny on an author whose opinion, even an opinion expressed thoughtfully, is too distasteful to them – though who knows if their actual purchase history follows through on that threat.

As a result, I know many authors struggle with how much of themselves to reveal on their websites, with many individuals refraining from discussing politics or news or favorite books or even television shows for fear of alienating their readership. I know more than one author who hesitated to mention whom she was voting for in the last election, because many readers see the romance community online as a politics-free zone.

Then there are authors like Suzanne Brockmann who not only wear their pride-colors proudly but donate proceeds to fund raise on behalf of her chosen causes by donating the proceeds from a recent novel – a novel featuring a gay protagonist pair. Some readers may be turned off, but there’s no mistaking Brockmann’s position. Even recently, she’s been most clear about her position on the subject, and how she feels people may react to her writing, and a whole lot of people were shocked and turned off by Brockmann’s reaction, particularly in that she assigned homophobic motivation to those who were upset at the plot of her latest book.

As I said earlier, it takes a hell of a lot for me to reach that line of Never-Buy, where I can’t see past the conviction of the author to lose myself in that author’s writing. So let’s visit the other end of that spectrum. I’ll be honest: this author’s website tripped right over my Never-Buy line.

However, let me be clear: it’s not a question of the fact that I disagree mightily with her opinion. I do, most holy shit heartily. But I know many people who do not see the same way I do when it comes to gay rights and homosexuality. I care for some people who see the idea of gayness in a diametric opposition to my own position, and when we discuss do discuss it, they try (I hope!) understand my opinion, and I try to understand theirs, even though I disagree so very very much. It’s not like disagreeing with me lands you on my shit list for life.

What I find most objectionable here is the manner in which the opinion is expressed in this particular instance. Or, more succinctly, the flying leap into the pool of WTF that this author has chosen to employ on her professional website.

On Dorchester author Autumn Dawn’s website, there’s a section called “Chatterbox” wherein she writes:

Naturally, my biblically based beliefs include “one man, one woman”
relationships. The bible states clearly that homosexuals will not enter the
kingdom of heaven. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is crystal clear about God’s
feelings about this. Contrary to the propaganda, I believe that
homosexuality is a choice, like stealing, like drinking, like drugs.
Addictive, sure, but a choice, one that can be overcome.

Making gay marriage legal won’t overcome their guilt, depression and
confusion. It won’t take away the pain they live with. So many children
are raped and grow up thinking they are gay as a result. Many come from
broken or dysfunctional homes. It’s the unadvertised truth of
homosexuality. Take a poll some time and see if it’s true….

I don’t share my personal beliefs with many as I’m a writer, and a romance one at that. This is what goes into my books, though. This is part of who I am.

Taking any extreme, whether you’re Brockmann or Dawn, yields some consequences, and the result depends on the reader.

But when the opinion is backed up by statements like “raped children are gay” and followed up with “take a poll…and see if it’s true,” the limit of my ability to see the narrative in spite of the author has been reached. Oh, how it has been reached.

It’s not even about royalties with me. Because Dawn says, “This is what goes into my books, though. This is part of who I am,” I don’t want to read her books, because I would be constantly wondering if any element of a book that rang oddly was a slight against homosexuality or if the subtext of any scene or thematic arc was a diatribe against gays.

The experience of reading this author’s website has tainted my ability to read beyond the author’s name to the story within the cover. I can agree or disagree with an author’s opinions and still read their books; I’ve done it before.

But when the manner in which the opinion is conveyed is so truly repulsive to me, I’m done. The line of Never-Buy has been crossed.

Where’s your line? What trips it? If you don’t want to be specific, that’s fine, but when dealing with efforts toward public branding of an author’s name online, where’s the line of Never-Buy for you as a reader?

 

Comments are Closed

  1. SandyW says:

    I’m not sure about the logic behind my very short Never Buy Again list. I’ve been off Crusie since the whole CE mess. I’ll probably buy her books again, just not yet. Another author took exception to requests that she state an opinion on the matter. I still buy her books, but I no longer participate in discussions on her blog. Again, that may change eventually.

    The one person I used to buy books by, but don’t anticipate buying ever again is Laura Lee Guhrke. She pushed one of my personal buttons in an AAR discussion a few years ago. I think she started by posting a reply to an editorial on wallpaper history. Ms. Guhrke maintained that she didn’t understand use of the term and no amount of explanation seemed to help. I thought that was pretty disingenuous of her, considering wallpaper history was what she had been writing since her move to Avon, but whatever. The discussion then moved to epublishers and Ms. Guhrke dismissed them as inconsequential and alleged that they ‘pay their authors next to nothing.’

    Jaid Black got into a fairly well-reasoned discussion with her on the matter. Ms. Black posted some round numbers, saying that the top tier of authors at EC made what amounted to $60,000 a year. I was impressed. That’s quit your day job money.

    Guhrke’s response (copied from Karen Scott):

    60K a year gross isn’t what I call good money. It’s respectable, but it’s not what I define as good. Again, it’s my personal opinion. As Karen said, by the time you pay agent fees, taxes and expenses, you’re taking home about $1500 a month if you’re lucky. That’s not what I call good money.

    I’m really not sure why this irritated my so much, although I do know that $60,000 a year is quite a bit more money than I earn. Anyway, I haven’t bought a book of hers since. Every time I read a review or see a new title by her, all I can think is, ‘Nope. Laura Lee Guhrke doesn’t need my money.’

  2. Marianne McA says:

    I didn’t read all of the B&N discussion, but I read the first few pages at the time – my take on it was that it was some of the readers who were behaving badly.
    I think that’s the problem with on-line discussions, that they move from site to site, and depending which bit you happen to come across, that your understanding of the discussion is coloured by your familiarity with, and attitude towards, that poster. (I’m not talking about Brockmann’s response to that particular poster: just my impression of that discussion – as far as I read it – in general.)
    As for the Never-Buy line – it’s permeable. Don’t understand it myself, but some people give up Brockmann with each new book. I think it’s a kind of inverted fandom.

  3. rebyj says:

    Naturally, my biblically based beliefs include “one man, one woman”
    relationships. … Contrary to the propaganda, I believe that
    homosexuality is a choice, like stealing, like drinking, like drugs.
    Addictive, sure, but a choice, one that can be overcome.

     

    ACK I was raised in a religion that taught if a boy was raped or even masterbated he’d “turn” gay. What bullshit. I’m shocked that in this day and age people still believe those theories have any merit whatsoever. 

      Evidently God/Jesus of the bible can mean whatever mankind wants him to say. That’s why there are over 34,000 versions of Christianity then add in all the sects of Judaism, Islam , Eastern religions, Wicca etc.  Pretty sucky odds of sticking your hand into a hat and drawing out the only one that will win the lottery and lead to salvation huh?

    Whatever anyones belief is , how can a free country base human rights on religion?  Which religion? Ultimately ,why do so many pass judgement and devalue THIS life and dispose of people because they bet on the “next” life?

  4. GrowlyCub says:

    I had only been a very occasional visitor of Mrs. Giggles, but after her rant I haven’t been back. 

    The reason, Crusie got more attention is that she’s a writer, who despite all claims to the contrary was and is endorsing CE and her plagiarism by vilifying the people who exposed it.  It’s especially galling from her, since not only is she a writer who could suffer the same fate as CE’s victims, she’s also an ex-academic, who has used that fact to improve her stature in the community or lend authority to her statements.

    Snarkhunter, I did not say that she said these things here on SBTB, I was referring to her blog posts and her comments on those blog posts.

  5. SB Sarah says:

    Crusie got more attention is that she’s a writer, who despite all claims to the contrary was and is endorsing CE and her plagiarism by vilifying the people who exposed it.  It’s especially galling from her, since not only is she a writer who could suffer the same fate as CE’s victims, she’s also an ex-academic, who has used that fact to improve her stature in the community or lend authority to her statements.

    Whoa, time out! I don’t think Crusie ever endorsed plagiarism. I wasn’t crazy about her original comment, but she never raised a banner of “Copy it all and profit, woo!”

    I don’t think she vilified us and I certainly don’t think she was endorsing plagiarism.

  6. Rachel says:

    Wow, I didn’t mean to stir up the hornet’s nest again!  Thanks for the clarifications, and I’m sorry for dragging up the past!

  7. GrowlyCub says:

    Marianne,

    there was a particular post towards the end of the Q&A that triggered my ‘oh, no she didn’t’ meter for Brockmann.

    Originally, it was the ‘folks who don’t like DoN must be homophobes’ bit that made my jaw hang open, but I now think the beginning was really where she disqualified herself the most in my opinion.

    I know that there’s been noise about DARK OF NIGHT, but from what I understand—without soiling myself too completely in the ugliness—that noise has been from just a relatively small group of disgruntled people—who seem to have more of a beef with me than with the book.

    I just cannot find this opener in any way professional and the argument that writers are human, too, just doesn’t fly in this context.  She’s a purveyor of goods she wants the readers to buy.  Smart PR dictates that you don’t talk down or insult the potential customers.  I think she ‘soiled’ herself quite considerably with that particular post.

  8. SAS says:

    My “author I won’t buy” story is:  Several years ago legislators in The Big City in our state started talking about banning pit bull dogs after a summer during which several people had been maimed and a couple people were even killed by that breed of dog.  One author whose books and blog I had read off and on (and who doesn’t even live in this state) opined about the ban on her blog. She didn’t agree with it.  Ok, fine.  But then she went on and on and even let her “personal assistant” have some time on the blog to opine about it.  Their arguments boiled down to accusing every person in the STATE – not just every person in The Big City, but the entire freaking state – of being mega-awful animal haters.  By the end of the multiple postings over multiple days the author and assistant had worked themselves into a good lather about it all.  I don’t even live in The Big City yet here this author and her BFF are calling me an animal hater/killer because of the fact that I live in the same state as The Big City.  That was it for me.  It’s one thing to say, “Hey, here’s this issue I feel strongly about and here are my arguments for/against it.”  It’s a totally different thing to scream hysterically and accuse everyone in shouting distance of being a horrible evil person.  I wouldn’t have been able to read another one of her books if I’d tried because the whole time I would be sitting there thinking, “This is the author that hates me, or at least thinks I’m an idiot, because of the state I live in!”

  9. GrowlyCub says:

    We’ll have to agree to disagree on our interpretation of what Crusie said and wrote in several venues, on her own blog and elsewhere.

    As I said and you pointed out in your original post, our respective meters of what’s over the line are set pretty differently.

  10. Lori says:

    I don’t really have a problem with the Brockmann comment because I interpret it quite differently the GrowlyCub did.  Face to face communication is tricky enough.  When you take away facial expression and tone of voice human beings are really disadvantaged. 

    One a happier note—-I agree with an earlier poster who said that online interaction with authors has actually been far more positive than negative for me.  I’ve been inspired to search out books by several people whose online comments have been smart and funny and kind.  It’s far easier to remember the very negative things, but that’s just how the human brain is wired and it often doesn’t reflect reality.     

    I don’t make New Year’s Resolutions but this year I am trying to be just a bit more focused on the good things.  It’s not in my nature to be Little Mary Sunshine, but I am trying to reward/reinforce the positive more often.

  11. SonomaLass says:

    I don’t go out of my way to find out about authors’ personal lives, political views ethics or manners, but when they rub my face in it, I do notice.  Most of the time, the authors who by doing so cross my “never buy line” are ones whose books I have never read, and now I won’t, kthx.  That’s true in fantasy as well as romance.  Never read Terry Goodkind anyway, nor Cassie Edwards, nor most of the others on my list.

    Orson Scott Card?  Yeah, that one hurt.  A lot.  But I just can’t pick up one of his books now, even beloved old favorites, without getting that slimy feeling.

    Anne Perry?  Doesn’t really bother me.  She did her time, after all, and was a juvenile; I’m a fan of rehab over retribution in penal systems (giggle @ “penal”), and it seems to me that she’s a good example.

    I do avoid contributing to certain companies (Domino’s, Smoking Loon come first to mind) when I know that the owners give large sums to social causes I don’t support.  When I know that, it’s because they’ve made big public announcements about it—they are obviously trying to attract certain people’s money, and those people are not me.  I figure that’s my choice.  If an author did that and I knew about it, he or she would go on my NBL.  But like I say, I don’t go looking for that sort of thing.

  12. Marie says:

    My never-buy line is fairly easy to cross because I read heavily in several genres—romance, YA, sci fi, fantasy, mystery, historical.  So when an author says something repulsive in the book or online, it’s pretty easy for me to take my time, attention, and money elsewhere. 

    Still, when I won’t buy an author it’s not necessarily meant as a statement… some are just so obvious in pushing their politics in their books that it’s unpleasant and distracting and I avoid the author thereafter.  My latest experience of this was Star Bright by Catherine Anderson, a real throw-it-against-the-wall piece of poorly written drivel.  I couldn’t even finish… I lost it after the third rant about how NEUTERING YOUR PETS IS INHUMANE, OMG. 

    I mean seriously, neutering????  I cannot deal with a debate over neutering in a romance novel. 

    I did skip to the end to catch the scene where the villain takes drugs to make all his hair fall out so he can’t be identified by his DNA when he murders his ex-wife.

    UM, WTF????  … I do not need just72 more reasons not to finish this book, the anti-neutering thing was enough.

  13. senetra says:

    NoBuy Authors for me tend to behave badly, online or elsewhere.  I don’t take offense easily, and can usually see both sides to any story.  Well, except the anger/annoyance/hair pulling over the Sophia/Decker ‘ship.  I guess they didn’t make that much of an impression on me over the course of the books.

    Anyway, there is one author in particular who I felt crossed a line on a site.  I can’t remember the site or the argument, just that the author told a commenter that they didn’t know what the f*ck they were talking about and to shut the f*ck up.  I had never even heard of her before then, but she is always the first author who pops into my head whenever anyone mentions Authors Behaving Badly.

  14. Amy says:

    My personal “do not buy” line consists of book content. If the writers “values” are so blatant that they preach throughout the book, and those “values” don’t mesh with my “happy, everyone’s equal because we are all in this together” utopia, then…well… they don’t get bought. Frankly, they can op-ed whatever on their web sites, it’s called freedom of speech here in the US of Amerika…well, so far it still is. And they can op-ed anything in their books too.

    Two-somes, hetero relations, three-somes, homosexual relations, cross-species, etc. It’s all good. I read paranormals and you get “all” kinds there. Mostly, the writing sells it…or not.

    Amy

  15. JulieT says:

    As I get older, I get more and more picky about what books I buy. Generally I only buy things I KNOW I will enjoy, from authors I have enjoyed in the past. But occasionally I’ll pick up something new, as I think we all do.

    What usually puts me over the ‘I will never buy anything by this author again ever’ line is bad writing, plotting and/or bad research. Back at the start of my romance reading, I read a book in which the hero got himself into a corner, plot-wise, and about 3/4 of the way through the book, a guardian angel – that had never been mentioned before – appeared and poofed him out of all his troubles. I heaved the book across the room and have never spent a penny on the author’s work again. These sorts of things annoy me.

    Bad research, I can forgive, depending. If it’s a nitpicking detail, I get over it. If it’s a huge glaring error, and there has been more than one, bye-bye. Not reading you again.

    I don’t read author web sites (except for Jenny Crusie ‘cause she makes me laugh like crazy, and think really hard). So when I hear about something from an author’s web site, that means it’s so bad it’s made the press. Which means I will usually quit buying. (When Laurell K Hamilton insulted all her fans, I’d have quit buying her stuff then. But I already had quit buying it for the previously mentioned sucky plotting issue.)

    Ethics I am also rather blase about, but since I’m a writer myself (non-fiction), I will NOT donate my cash to the income of a plagiarist. Haven’t bought (or read) a Janet Daley novel since the whole mixup with Nora Roberts. (And I’d have quit reading/buying Cassie Edwards, but I’d already quit because of how offensive her treatment of Native Americans is.)

    So that’s about it. Of course there’s also the ‘I just don’t like it’ issue, but I’d say that’s pretty common among all of us.

  16. PlainJane says:

    I usually put people on my do not buy list for writing bad books.  That’s pretty much the only qualification.

    And while it’s not quite the question you asked, I would like to address the idea of rape making a person gay, which I hope most people do not believe.

    I live in San Francisco, the self-proclaimed gayest city in the world.  I live with both a gay man and a lesbian.  I have lived with homosexuals for over eight years, even helping one friend go through her very painful coming out.  Every other weekend or so, we go to gay bars and dance to supposedly gay music.  And I’m not gay.  If someone can “catch the gay” I’d be so flaming, the ocean couldn’t put me out.  Yet I still like, even sleep with, men. 

    When I was fifteen, I was nearly raped by someone who I thought was a friend.  I managed to fight my way out of his clutches (ladies, you CAN fight back) and get away somewhere safe.  And while the incident did profoundly affect my trust in the male species, it didn’t turn me towards women.  I brought up this point to someone making the raped-means-gay argument, and they implied that had I not fought off the person and actually been raped, I would have been gay.

    They managed to make my save-them-last-out-of-a-burning-building list. And that one’s hella harder to make than my DNB list.

    If you ever hear someone making that claim, please, feel free to give them my email.  plainjanelane at gmail dot com.  I’ll explain to them how the difference of about six second and a swift kick to the groin was not the deciding factor in my sexual preferences.

    And sorry this is waxing poetic, but I would like to mention that romance novels actually played a big role in my eventually learning to trust men again.  That, however, is a subject for another time.

  17. I had written a long-ass post but I suppose it’s somewhere in Electronic Hell. Here’s the SparkNotes version. My blog I write what I want to write. Do I offend people? Yep. But then, I’ve been offending people since I got kicked out of Sunday School for calling Saint Paul a sexist. Didn’t change my opinion then, won’t change my opinion now. I loathe religious extremists of any stripe and won’t knowingly have anything to do with them. People have warned me that my views probably impact my bottom line. That’s unfortunate, but I remain ‘unbought and unbossed’ to take Shirley Chisolm WAAAYY out of context. Presumably those authors who expressed their views understood as I do that people often speak with their pocketbook. I respect that, as I sure as hell do.

  18. Lori says:

    PlainJane, I’m so sorry about the assault and glad that you were able to save yourself.  And I totally hear you about how delusional people are if they think that bad experiences and hanging around w/gay people can turn you gay.  My continued fondness for the dudes is also proof.   

    I have to add that I LOVE this:

    They managed to make my save-them-last-out-of-a-burning-building list.

    It sounds like something I would say.  I mean you can’t just abandon a person in a burning building because s/he’s an ass.  That would be wrong and I like to think of myself as being a good person.  But you can totally save the more deserving first.

  19. Count me among the people who can distance themselves from an author’s personal views, so long as they don’t express them in a hateful, ignorant, or offensive manner.  I’m more likely to get turned off an author based on how he/she acts in public, or to me, when I meet him/her.  I come back from RT every year with a list of “Will buy/Will never buy” based on those factors alone.  One author I was on a panel with in Houston was so flat out dismissive and rude, rolled her eyes after every answer I gave and mocked me for laughs, yeah, I don’t care how great her books are, I will never buy them and, because I’m childish and spiteful, I tell everyone what a total d-bag she was.

    I have to admit that I am careful about stuff I say on my blog as it pertains to certain topics… and anyone who has ever read my blog is probably making a jerking-off motion right now and going, “Yeah, right,” but really, I am more restrained on the internet than I am in real life.  Why?  Because I want to sell books.  There are things in this world that I find flat out freaking stupid, but I am aware that others might totally love them and they might be offended by my staunch anti-those-things attitude if I threw it out there.  Their offense might be so great that they no longer buy my books… and I love money more than I hate the things that piss me off, so I make that choice.

    That said, I know I lost readers during this last election because of my vocal support of President Obama on my facebook and my blog.  But I felt strongly about the subject and, you know, oh well.  I figure that loss of those readers is the price I paid for speaking my mind about something that was important to me, and it was worth every cent I lost.

    There are a lot of people in here talking about how writers respond to reviewers, or whatever, and that turning them off… well, how would you like it if someone strolled into your job and started talking shit about you?  That’s what happens to authors, at times, and everyone has a breaking point.  Sometimes, reviews cross over from “I didn’t like this work,” to “I didn’t like this work, and it means the author is a bad person.”  That Laurielikesbooks woman called me a sadist when my first book came out.  It was the worst book of the year, it was terrible, okay, lady, I get that you didn’t like it.  You are totally free to not like it.  You are not free to call me a sadist and imply that I’m some kind of sick freak because you couldn’t handle the gore in my books.  Criticize my work all you want, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to play nice so that I don’t offend readers if someone comes after me personally.

    When Anne Rice lashed out at her fans, I was like, “Ugh, puh-leeze,” but then I put myself in her shoes.  I do the same thing when Laurel Hamilton goes off about her negative readers.  With both those authors, the readers aren’t just criticizing the work.  They’re making judgments against the authors personally, talking about their religion, or their marriage situation.  That’s ridiculous, and they have every right to lash out at the reviews that cross that line.

  20. Lori says:

    They’re making judgments against the authors personally, talking about their religion, or their marriage situation.  That’s ridiculous, and they have every right to lash out at the reviews that cross that line.

    The thing is that both Rice & Hamilton made those things very front & center and used them in their work.  They were happy to have it out there when it was perceived as a net positive, but got mad when people started to criticize. 

    I have HUGE personal space issues and I think fighting dirty really sucks so I normally have no patience with personal attacks.  Calling you a sadist was over the line.  I do think things get a little trickier when the personal stuff becomes a big part of the work.

  21. Wedschilde says:

    :::sighs::::

    Bigotry makes black-footed ferrets cry.

  22. CrankyBeach says:

    Suze Brockmann is a terrific writer, and she can write whatever she wants.

    I have several gay friends, of both genders.

    I do NOT want to know what they do behind closed doors, any more than they want to know what I do behind closed doors.

    And I don’t want to read about what Brockmann’s gay characters are doing to each other in their intimate moments.

    It trips my “ick” meter, plain and simple.

    Does that make me a homophobe? No, no more than having my “ick” meter tripped by watching just a couple of minutes of a hard-core porn (hetero) film that someone I knew brought over once makes me a heterophobe.

    There are some things I would really rather not know, or read about. And that is my opinion and my opinion alone. Your mileage may vary.

  23. Betsy says:

    As a certified Rape Crisis counselor, I just have to say that if being raped made you gay, there’d be a hell of a lot more gay people in the world.
    My never-buy line is hard to cross, but if I feel like I’m being lectured to instead of just being offered a good story, it annoys me no matter what the “message.”

  24. Alex says:

    I’ve seen a writer who has a very, very good way of handling bad reviews.

    He doesn’t read any reviews. He writes things, he mails them off to magazines, and sometimes they send him a letter with a note of acceptance and a check.

    The next day, he writes more. As long as he gets paid, he figures he’s getting the last laugh. (Hah! Pun! That’s the name of a column he often writes!)

    http://www.mcmanusbooks.com/biography/dear_bio.html

  25. I’m more likely to get turned off an author based on how he/she acts in public, or to me, when I meet him/her. 

    I agree with this statement. At National last year I had the misfortune to run into an author whom will forever be in my DO NOT BUY list and when the opportunity arises, I share my experience with others because this young woman was a complete asshat. I won’t go into details here but I will gladly share with anyone privately because the golden rule at National is you never know who is listening or who is friends with who so watch your mouth and be on your best behavior.

  26. Leah G says:

    Reading this, I realized that I really don’t have, at this point, a do-not-buy author.  I never have bought Janet Dailey or Cassie Edwards, and just kinda gloss by their books on the shelf, but I hadn’t bought any before I learned about their plagiarism, so I don’t think that counts.

    I will say that I am a conservative Christian, and there was a time when it seemed like every time I turned around, someone was calling for a boycott on someone or something.  I know it makes people feel good to think they’re sticking it to a TV network, etc;, but when I really think about it, I don’t believe that I have that much control.  For example, if a guy stops me on the street and says, “hey, I need a few bucks so I can buy some crack,” well, I’m not going to help him out.  But the money I spend at the grocery store will contribute to the paychecks of plenty of men and women who are doing things that they shouldn’t, or that I don’t agree with.  To avoid accidentally supporting anyone who is doing anything immoral, I would pretty much have to be completely self-sufficient….and then, am I all that holy myself?  Nah, not the last time I checked.  Now, a boycott targeting a specific local business, say, a restaurant, for a specific practice like discrimination, would be useful.  But other than that, I think it just makes people feel good to make that personal stand w/ their wallets. 

    Personally, I would probably quit buying an author who was a pedophile.  That would really bother me and I would not be able to dismiss it.  I would quit buying a non-fiction author who purposely lied in his/her books.  I don’t buy people like Ann Coulter who seem to be just plain mean.  I haven’t read Patricia Cornwell in awhile because I wasn’t that interested in Scarpetta’s personal life, which seemed to be usurping the mystery; also, I have a pet peeve about too many coincidences/personal involvement in crime thrillers, and her later Scarpetta books had a lot of that.  I haven’t read Anne Perry for awhile, for no particular reason, but I admit that I think about that case every time I see her books.  It always makes me wonder how she deals with that event, mentally and emotionally—the impact it has had on her life.  What would it be like?  I feel bad, because I am sure that is not the first thing she wants people to associate with her name and work.

    Oh—OJ Simpson is a do-not-buy.  For obvious reasons.

    But for the most part, I believe that most of us are basically decent, don’t have it all figured out, and are trying to muddle through as best we can.  We have things that we’re screwing up, but still have something of value to offer, whether it’s a novel, or advice, or a skill.  Maybe that’s a little wishy-washy, but it keeps me sane!

  27. @job:

    There’s a salient difference between a doctor and an author.  That difference is that a doctor’s religious/political beliefs do not normally encompass religion.  On some small occasions, they interact.  I do care about a doctor’s religion if he comes from a religion that for instance, doesn’t believe in surgery, and he lets that effect his performance.  I do care about a psychologist’s beliefs if he thinks that gay people are mentally disturbed and need treatment to be helped.  Caring about a doctor’s beliefs in those circumstances makes sense; caring about them when they couldn’t make a damned bit of difference is irrational.

    There’s more occasion to care about authors’ beliefs, especially with authors who write books that end with feminine fulfillment.  If an author believes women are best staying at home and losing careers, her HEA might reflect that, with the heroine giving up her day job in favor of family and making casseroles—something I would find unsatisfying.  You can’t help but put some of your beliefs in your books.  Even if you don’t try to club readers over the head with your beliefs, what you think is “happy” is somewhat determined by how you view the world.

    Putting authors on the non-buy list because you think their political/religious beliefs, as expressed, mean you won’t be able to enjoy their books is just smart use of resources.  Can it become creepy?  Yes, if you’re creepy about it—anything taken to the extreme sounds like a terrible idea.  But the solution is to not be extreme about it, not to avoid the behavior all together.

    The other thing that differentiates exercising personal choice from, say, Nazi book-burning, is that censorship is something governments do, not something individuals do.  Sometimes, governments should not do things—like say which books can and can’t be purchased—precisely BECAUSE that decision should be left to individuals.

    Think about it this way—it is ultra-creepy when a government says, “You can vote for whoever you want, as long as it’s for Mugabe.”  Even if that statement is not backed up by force, it’s just wrong for a government to put its finger on the scales that way.  But it is perfectly fine—acceptable—if an individual endorses Barack Obama.  (Or John McCain, y’know.)

    It’s not censorship if I don’t buy a book.  It’s not book burning if I decide to avoid certain authors.  It’s a personal choice—and just because I exercise that choice personally does not mean I support the government’s right to exercise that choice for all society.

  28. Rebecca says:

    Warning: long post.

    It is a great relief to me that most books I purchase or borrow from the library are well-written. What puts me off a book or an author is bad craft and shoddy art.
    I don’t expect authors to be nice or gregarious or politic. That said, it is *always* nice to be greeted with politeness and grace – by any creative person. Moodiness is no longer romantic or mysterious – it’s rude.

    Never buy thresholds:
    -Bad editing
    -Consistently bad writing (technical)
    -Dumb plots
    -Inconsistent characterization
    -Inconsistent world-building
    -Mis-use of period jargon
    -Overall lack of verisimilitude
    -Plagiarism
    -Purple prose
    -Rampant use of anachronism in a historical (that would make a great prize title)
    -Sloppy fact checking
    -Sloppy history
    -TA heroes (Too Alpha)
    -TSTL heroines

    Re Brockmann:
    I read through a lot of the B&N interchange and am not bothered at all by Ms. Brockman’s response to hopefloats. Hopefloats seems to have predicated her questions on the concept that authors write to respond to reader rather than to serve the story that’s in their heads. Do

    She used hopefloat’s four paragraph question to respond to what sounds like a hailstorm of criticism and wacko anger surrounding her new book. There are four sentences in hopefloat’s 4P question that, I think, set Ms. Brockmann off:

    How do you keep a pulse on what your readers are thinking?  Are you concerned that relying on your own BB, which by nature has more fans than critics, your opportunity to hear/learn/understand valid criticism from your readers is limited?

     

    and

    IMO, the biggest criticism of DON and this story arc is many readers feel they were shown one thing and then told something very different….How much weight should your readers give to what is shown vs. what is told when reading your books?

    It is my opinion that Ms. Brockmann responded to hopefloats’ question with great frankness. I detected frustration and some temper in her response to hopefloats, but no flippancy. So Ms. Brockmann was frustrated by the premise, so what. This won’t turn me off of reading her books.

    Also, did you all notice the length of her responses to each question? She spent a lot of time on those answers. She obviously took time to respond to each question. That level of care signals to me that she does care about her readership.

  29. Not, of course, to imply that there are a lot of authors I avoid.  Just that where I set my personal line—or where someone else sets their line—is also a matter of personal choice, and I don’t think it’s even vaguely Nazi-like to say “I won’t buy X because I don’t like what she said about Y.”

  30. aninsomniac says:

    @CrankyBeach: I’m sorry, but I have to ask you to clarify about the ick factor. Do you really think gay romance is at the same level as HARD CORE het porn? Doesn’t that sound a bit… biased?

    -anin

  31. Suze says:

    Argh, too many posts to read, not enough time to read them.

    Usually, people with politics I disagree with don’t write books I enjoy reading, or at least don’t allow their politics to pollute their writing.  What moves an author off my reading list is that their books become unenjoyable.

    Piers Anthony fell off my preferred-author list in the 1980’s, when his Author’s Notes become longer than the novels they were attached to.  Self-righteous egotist.  I stopped reading LKH not because she went crazy, but because her books started to suck.  I still enjoy her early ones, and I would probably still enjoy Anthony’s early ones if I felt like going back to re-read them.

    When an author posts something I disagree with, I can get past it and still enjoy a well-written novel.

    When an author does something that reveals the author to be so freaking credulous and STUPID, as Dawn’s note about rape causing people to become gay, their dumbness taints everything they’ve written.  Or, when they’ve done something so foul I can’t get past it (no specific examples come to mind, but if I found out a favourite author was a child molester, I wouldn’t be able to read anything by him or her again, without CHILD MOLESTER shouting out from every page).

    After I know that an author believes something so completely idiotic (for example, that Christians in North America are discriminated against), then nothing they say or write is at all believable.  I can’t trust anything they say, and even if they write something interesting, articulate, and well, I dismiss it, because it was written by somebody too dumb to be published.

  32. Jessica says:

    I have to say that if I think about it there are few things that an author could say that might make me not want to read him/her.  I don’t know what that says about me but it is true. Then again, if the book were just so good, you see, I’m not sure.  If it were Ann Colter, no problem, I know I”m not buying anything by her but if it is fiction, that is different. Interesting topic

  33. I just buy their books second-hand when I find out that an author is manifestly bat-shit crazy in the bad way (why, hello, there, Anne McCaffrey).

    I admit to being boggled here; my “home genre” is SF/fantasy, and whereas I’m more or less familiar with many of the kerfuffles and figures of controversy in the genre (Anthony and Card being two of the most prominent, as others have noted above), I don’t think I’ve ever run across a sentiment of this kind concerning Anne McCaffrey.  Ms. Manna, I’d be very interested in the context of the above comment. 

    In the interests of full disclosure, I should note that a friend of mine is a very long-standing friend of Ms. McCaffrey’s; through that connection I’ve met the author herself, briefly, on one occasion.  This does not predispose me to judge new information one way or the other; I’d just like to know what the story is that’s given rise to the above conclusion.

  34. Suze says:

    I don’t want to read about what Brockmann’s gay characters are doing to each other in their intimate moments.

    It trips my “ick” meter, plain and simple.

    Do you read steamy hetero love scenes?  Because if you enjoy those, and gay love scenes ick you out, then that would make me question your statement that you’re not homophobic.

    Why compare gay love scenes in a romance to hetero porn videos?  Why not compare them to hetero loves scenes in a romance?

  35. If I say a book or a work of art can be judged just by who wrote it and not what it says … I’m using the same rational that led the Nazis to burn books by Jews.—Job

    Nazis burning books by Jews is persecution, based on racist prejudice.  Refusing to buy a book/ get medical treatment/ go to the local shop because I don’t like the race or religion or sexual orientation of the author/ doctor/ shop owner is likewise prejudice.—Imogen Howson

    This line really bothers me because while I personally think it is foolish not to read/patronize/etc someone who is really good at what they do because of their race, religion, gender, creed or sexual orientation, I also think it is a big leap from one individual making that choice to a whole regime enforcing brutal oppression, censorship and genocide.  They are both prejudice and certainly individual prejudice may feed into greater regime prejudice, but maybe it’s just me, I hate when an individual’s choice to be a narrow-minded, prejudiced biggot gets conflated with a regime that killed millions of people. To me, it belittles the horrors of the latter. 

    People make all sorts of narrow-minded choices as individuals. Lucky us, they have the freedom to do so in this country. I also have the freedom to call them bigots. Once my government starts burning books of a particular group that’s a whole different kettle of fish.

    That said, and my apologies if I was heavy handed, my do-not buy line is pretty hard to cross.  Plagiarism definitely crosses that line. I will not buy or read the work of plagiarists. 

    I have some issues that I personally do not want supported by my dollars. For those authors I enjoy but disagree with, I buy second hand or borrow from the library; for businesses, I simply boycott. 

    The real kicker for me is bad writing though—or bad acting, bad customer service etc etc—and if I read 2 books in a row from an author that are no longer at my minimum standard for writing, if I am spending a lot of time diagramming their sentences instead of enjoying the story, well, I stop buying. 

    Of course, if an authors opinions are really contrary to mine, I am unlikely to buy their work as I will not enjoy their subject matter or their handling of the stories. For example: the Left Behind books … I’ll never read these because they are so contrary to my world view that I simply wouldn’t enjoy the story.  I suspect that the work of Autumn Dawn falls into this category for me too since she says her views inform her work.  But for me, these examples are more in the category of “do not try” rather than “do no buy.”

  36. Eileen Wilks says:

    Some parts of this discussion could be seriously depressing for me as a writer…the no. of people who says their “don’t buy” buttons are easily tripped, for example.  Argh!  How do I know I’m not doing that right now? And those who say they’re anti-Brockman or anti-Cruisie.  I haven’t seen those 2 authors’ comments and don’t plan to look them up, but Jenny’s always been funny, edgy, opinionated, and brilliant, and I can certainly imagine her saying something that bugged people.  But enough to stop reading her books?  Oh, my.

    Sometimes the Internet reminds me of jr. high, with lots of “he said, she said, omg, she didn’t?”—when the truth is she really didn’t, but the quote was taken out of context, or was garbled, or whatever, but it’s to late now—everyone’s choosing sides.

    But the original question is whether we ever refuse to buy an author because of her views.  My answer is: yes, of course.  And no, of course not.

    For the yes part of the answer: how could an authors’ views not matter?  The way we see the world—our viewpoints—informs what we write, how we write it, what our characters are like. 

    For the no part of my answer:  it would be dull, dull, dull to read only writers who agree with me about everything.  I get to spend plenty of time in my own head; I read (in part) to see what it’s like in other people’s worlds.

    But an author like Dawn Autumn (or was it Autumn Dawn?) who wants to write about a world in which gay is a lifestyle choice made by people who were abused as children and are condemned by her version of god . . . well.  It isn’t just that I disagree with her, though I certainly do.  Her beliefs don’t invite me in; they shut me out.  It’s hard to imagine that I’d be interested in the world she creates for her characters.  I’d guess that, from her POV, that’s okay.  She isn’t trying to connect with me.  She has a different sort of reader in mind.

    So I guess I agree with those who say it’s more about how and author expresses her views, in most cases.  With the caveat that a few viewpoints are inherently alienating.  Pedophilia is an easy example. For me, religiously cloaked homophobia does it, too.

    But I also lol’d over Marie’s post:

    I did skip to the end to catch the scene where the villain takes drugs to make all his hair fall out so he can’t be identified by his DNA when he murders his ex-wife.

    UM, WTF????  … I do not need just72 more reasons not to finish this book, the anti-neutering thing was enough.

    Yep.  I’ll add anti-pet-neutering rants to my list of inherently alienating views.  And thanks for the chuckle.

    Eileen

  37. CrankyBeach says:

    I think if I were a true homophobe, I would not care to include gay people in my list of friends. Close friends, even.

    Okay, setting aside the hard-core porn for a moment… here’s another thing that really, REALLY trips my “ick” meter.

    The thought of my parents doing . . .  that which accounts for my very existence on this planet.

    Not homosexual relations, not hard-core porn, just normal male-female relations. Between two married people. My parents. Relations that would be sanctioned (and even encouraged) by just about any religious belief system you might care to name. And yet….

    YUUUUCK!!!

    I’ve never done anything resembling a scientific poll… but I’ve never run across anyone who was NOT really, really grossed out by that thought…. I think it’s universal. So what kind of ‘phobe is that? Not being a smart-aleck, just curious. Really.

  38. Lissa says:

    @ Jennifer Armentrout:
    There are a lot of people in here talking about how writers respond to reviewers, or whatever, and that turning them off… well, how would you like it if someone strolled into your job and started talking shit about you?  That’s what happens to authors, at times, and everyone has a breaking point. 

    I would like to point out that a reviewer responding negatively to an author’s work is different than someone coming into my office and bashing me because the author has presented his/her work for public approvial and the person sitting in his/her office has not.  There is quite a difference there IMO.

    I do agree with you that a review of a book should not encompass any personal remarks about the authors beliefs or supposed beliefs.  A good review should focus on the content of the book itself whether postivie or negative and leave personal opinions about the author out of it. Some reviewers step over the line, which I am sure, is difficult for an author to take.  However, my opinion of both reviewer and author can be and is shaped by how the reviewer reviews and how the author responds or doesn’t respond.

    I don’t think I have ever seen an author or celebrity garner greater respect by responding to a negative review.  Most times it just makes the responder look like a petulent child.

  39. Linday Robinson says:

    @job
    While I respect your opinion, I think the comparison only really works if an individual decides to stop reading Author X (for whatever reason), decides that no one else should read this author either, and takes steps to make the books inaccessible to others (by stealing all the library copies, for example, or complaining to the library management in order to have them removed).  If the individual decides to impose their choice on other people (or if, as Courtney says, a government does so) then we have a problem.  But an individual making a choice on how to spend their money or time – no matter how bigoted or wrong-headed I might find the reasons for their choice – is their own business.

    As for my personal never-buy line, it depends on if I’ve read the author before.  I can overlook bad online behaviour if I really love the author’s work (unless their behaviour is really heinous), but if it’s a new to me author it will put me off ever picking up one of their books.  This is why I avoid blogs and messageboards for authors I really enjoy, because I don’t want to know what it would take for me to feel I couldn’t read one of them anymore.

  40. hapax says:

    PlainJane: That, however, is a subject for another time.

    And I, for one, would love to read about it.

Comments are closed.

By posting a comment, you consent to have your personally identifiable information collected and used in accordance with our privacy policy.

↑ Back to Top