I interrupt your daily can-can of RITA Reader Reviews for… a few words on reviewing!
I keep thinking that someday we're going to be over the “Reviewers are mean bullies!” thing, or the whole “You didn't say nice things so I'm going to say mean things about YOU” thing.
Clearly I overdosed on optimism.
Here's what I don't think is clearly understood regarding online reviews and discussions:
This is how readers interact with books.
We react passionately and loudly and sometimes with big ladles of snark to the books we read. This is how readers talk about books. I believe that we always have.
The difference now, with all that social media and interaction, is that it's easier to find, and sometimes, difficult to avoid.
But everyone, authors, readers and everyone else, we are all driven and compelled and encouraged to interact with and create in response to the entertainment we consume. Reviews are part of everything now.
Clay Shirky wrote in Cognitive Surplus,
[Y]oung populations with access to fast, interactive media are shifting their behavior away from media that presupposes pure consumption. Even when they watch video online, seemingly a pure analog to TV, they have opportunities to comment on the material, to share it with their friends, to label, rate, or rank it, and of course, to discuss it with other viewers around the world.
Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. Penguin Group. Kindle Edition.
Readers have always talked frankly about books that inspire reaction, positive or negative. With the addition of social media, we are less and less content to passively consume books – especially if, as is true for some romance readers, there aren't many people with whom we can discuss the books we read. Interaction about books online is the natural progression of our own reactions.
I've talked about this on panels at conferences before: it used to be when you drove into Manhattan through the Lincoln Tunnel (slowly, because there's traffic like you've never imagined) there'd be a big ass billboard for Absolut vodka. At the bottom: absolut.com.
For some time now that same billboard has instead directed people to facebook.com/absolut.
It is more valuable for that company to have consumers interacting and talking about their product on Facebook than it is to have their eyeballs on the Absolut.com website. A website, I imagine, they paid umpty-zillion dollars for.
The conversation and interaction in response to what we consume is essential. It is normal. It is not always positive. It is always valuable.
It is why we tweet during a tv show, and write recaps afterward. It's why we write reviews of movies on blogspots that maybe 6 people or 6 million people will read. And it's why we write reviews, positive and negative, online and off, about EVERYTHING.
Whenever I see someone react with outrage and pity for an author who received a harsh review here or anywhere, my reaction is always confusion and disappointment. When I read someone react with fury and pitchforks about a negative review, questioning the reviewers intelligence and biological makeup, I am completely baffled.
We're still angry that readers are honest about what they think about books? WHY? I'd rather honesty than false admiration and condescension.
You might have surmised that my writing here has been inspired by the “Stop the Goodreads Bullies” website, which posts pictures, names, locations and identifying information about reviewers they dislike.
Here's a perfect response to anyone who thinks this GR Bullies bullshit is a great idea from Foz Meadows:
[A]ny public figure, regardless of whether they’re an author, actor, sportsperson or journalist, must resign themselves to a certain amount of public criticism. Not everyone will like you, your work or even necessarily your profession, and nor will they be under any obligation to protect your sensibilities by being coy about it. A negative review might mean you lose sales, but that’s not a gross unfairness for which the reviewer should be punished, no matter how snarky they are: it is, rather, a legitimate reflection of the fact that, in their personal and professional estimation as a consumer of your work, they don’t believe that other people should buy it. And yes, you’re allowed to feel sad about that, but it’s still going to happen; it’s still going to be legal and normal.
What she said.
(Also, Kat Kennedy's new and improved autobiography in response to the site is brilliant.)
But let me put that another way. I don't believe the people behind that site are “other readers.” The response is so similar to the outrage and fury that greets bad reviews. And I think this needs to be said about creating entertainment and reviews:
Criticism that we don't like is part of what we signed up for when we published.
Let me say this again: bad reviews? Really long angry reviews about how insanely mad a book made a reader? Really wonderful squeeful reviews about how wonderful the book was? Reviews that say, “Meh”?
This is what we signed up for when we published.
This is what happens when we publish a book, a piece of entertainment for someone else to pay for and read.
We may have the most meanest critique partner in the world, but she is nothing to the reader who paid $9 for a book and was disappointed.
This is what happens when readers read books: we get irate sometimes and giddy other times. Now we interact more about the giddy and the irate, and that interaction, positive or negative, is valuable. More importantly, it's normal.
And this, by which I mean reviews in all flavors, is how entertainment works now: something is created. Someone consumes that creation. That someone will be encouraged in a variety of subtle and direct ways to interact or create in response to that something which was consumed. That cycle will continue.
The age of universal admiration and nothing but praise is long gone, and isn't coming back. It shouldn't. If we want the romance genre to grow, authors should be free to review books as candidly as any reader.
More than anything, we have trust readers. Trust that we (all of us as readers) are intelligent and able to make decisions individually and personally.
Trust that we can see through a review that was more about the author than the book.
Trust that most of the time, when we say we hated a book and rip up many words of ire as to why, we're talking about the book.
As for the GR “Bullies” crap, it demonstrates a belief that people are not intelligent enough to make decisions on their own about the motivations of a writer, to decide who they want to listen to, and who they don't. That the response to reviewers we don't like is not to stop reading or listening to them. That some reviewers are more valid than other reviewers, and that some reviewers should be humiliated until they stop reviewing.
Oh, no.
Reviews of all types are part of everything we consume now, from vacuum cleaners to hotels in Portland.
No book – no thing that is consumed – is immune or excused from review now. We are each of us more and more adept at discerning who and what we trust when we look for opinions.
So outing and attempting to shame reviewers for doing what everyone does in different forms and different venues is counterintuitive, cruel, and hypocritical (especially the part where those doing the exposing hide behind pseudonyms).
But beyond the existence of that or any other site, this idea that reviews aren't welcome in romance or in any genre continues to baffle me. Reviews, positive or negative, are essential. Reviews are part of social media. Reviews are part of everything. They aren't going anywhere.
So review something. Anything. Review all the things! And don't let anyone tell you you're doing it wrong. The answer to reviews is more reviews.
Thank you to BigStock for the image!
Wow. Thanks for calling out that site, I would have never known! I tend to post mostly positive reviews online but I am scared for my life anyway.
I am mostly annoyed by negative reviews of the sort saying just “I hated it!! Avoid!!’ and giving zero constructive criticism. But I don’t call them ‘bullying’ I call them ‘spamming’. They annoy us sophisticated readers as well.
KZoeT, the simplest way to look at it is this:
Reviews are not written for authors. They’re neither meant to tear us down or stroke our egos. They’re written for readers.
The “essential interaction” taking place is between a reader who’s invested his or her own valuable time in reading a book, and the other readers who have an interest in what the reviewer has to say.
And yes, in my opinion, the author has no place in that discussion.
James A Michener, in his autobiography “The World is My Home”, tells how he once got a piece of advice about how to deal with criticism from his mentor, Hugh MacNair Kahler:
“‘Never complain. Never explain. Never disdain.’ To complain makes you look petty and juvenile…And don’t try to explain. If you’ve spent three hundred pages putting your thoughts down and haven’t succeeded, what makes you think you can clarify them in a one-page letter?…And as for disdaining your critics, remember…They’re probably brighter than you, have thought more deeply about literature, and could probably write a damned sight better than you if they put their minds to it.”
Michener calls this the Professional Writer’s Code. I call it Brilliant Advice.
There’s a television show that I used to madly adore, and a group of fellow fans with whom I communicate regularly. I’ve noticed an interesting trend this year, which is that we’ve stopped hashtagging the show name in twitter and often are even obscure about the names we use, ie referring to J rather than spelling out the character’s name. That’s because any online conversation is public. It includes the creators and actors, and there’s no getting around that. We could say, “oh, we’re just talking about the show and we can say anything we want to, the creators aren’t invited to this conversation” but that would be disingenuous at best. Public conversations are public and the creators are the people most interested in the conversation. Even if they don’t speak, they’re listening. Pretending that they’re not is a polite fiction, at best. We could, of course, be more blatant about how much we hate the direction in which they took the show, but interestingly, no one wants to go there. Or at least so I surmise from the way we’ve begun to hide the conversation, while still continuing to have it.
One thing I think people like that are missing is, bad reviews tend to have a lot more detail about the book than 100 five star reviews that all basically say “OMG!!!eleventy!! BEST.BOOK.EVER.” And that can still translate into sales.
I’ve personally bought books after a poke through the “bad” reviews has convinced me that the various problems people had with the book aren’t going to bug me too much.
Years ago I wouldn’t think twice about posting a review on Amazon, particularly when a novel exceeded my expectations. In today’s tempestuous atmosphere I find myself increasingly cautious about sharing my opinions – whether positive or constructive.
As an author I’ve discovered that some of my best reviews were actually the 3 out of 5 star ones. When a reviewer takes the time to articulate what worked and what didn’t work in a particular story they are usually warning some readers to stay clear because the story might push a hot button while at the same enticing other readers to pick up the book because of the things they believe the author did well.
Do I adore every book that I read? No. Will every reader swoon over my stories? Not unless I pay them in advance 🙂
I wrote a post telling authors this stuff on my blog this week. Yes, it’s what we signed up for. And all a bad review means is you’ve joined the Big Leagues! Bad Reviews: 6 Reasons to be Glad You Have Them http://annerallen.blogspot.com…
“creating a list to insult authors, not for their work or for the quality of their work, but for something about the way they’ve interacted online seems … well, not like a review”
No, it’s not a review. It’s a warning to readers that these are authors who react badly to criticism, or who otherwise make life difficult for anyone who interacts with them. I’m familiar with the kind of authors on the list, and the ones Ridley has tagged, for instance. Warning people is a valid thing to do.
“I think it’ll be my loss, but maybe their loss, too. “
I interact with readers all the time. I post all over the place under my pen name. Have people said they won’t read my books because they disagree with my view on this or that? Yes. Do I care? No. It’s part of being in the public eye.
You can’t see a difference between that site and a list on GR about badly behaving authors? You see them as equivalent?
Well, Sarah, here’s a thing. I’ve been tagged maliciously at GR, and god knows how many fly by 1 stars attached to my books, and my Amazon reviews downrated. Every time there’s a blow up with which I’m even tangentially involved, I get this. I’ve had GR users call me a cunt and a bitch and a homophobe, which is nothing but abuse – and GR refused to do anythign about it, which is why I closed my account there.
But that’s not *bullying*. I could and did walk away from that mess simply by leaving GR. I could have simply not visited the site too. None of it was brought to my space, or my house.
But I really was bullied in fandom. I have hate email sent to me, my real name and details put up on numerous sites (as well as emails of friends’ children and complete strangers mistaken for me), I’ve been ostracised from social circles because of fabricated stories passed around about me, and this shit is still following me ten years after I left fandom completely. I can’t walk away from it.
In ‘real’ life, I’ve had stalking phonecalls from ex lovers, and letters. I actually moved to get away from this. I’ve been targetted at school because of my father’s job. Short of leaving school, I couldn’t get away from it.
The difference between abuse and bullying is whether the victim can disengage. An author has a clear choice not to read her reviews, not to engage with reviewers, not to spam forums and get into fights with readers on Amazon, not to write idiotic blog posts attacking readers and so on. Ridley can’t change her appearance, Kat her name or her marital situation, etc. And they can’t, presumably, move, if these dipshits post their real addresses on line.
“an I really not respond to that one-star reviewer for fear of being added to a list of “author temper tantrums?” Because that, to me, seems a lot like giving in to bullying. “
A 1 star review is not bullying. And until you realise that, you are going to look like an idiot when you talk about this. I suggest you stop before you do your reputation harm.
from your post:
”
Or there was the time I went to check out a new book mentioned in a Tweet and saw it had ten reviews already: all one-star—all attacking the author personally, saying nothing about the book.
It was an obvious example of cyberbullying. (For more on dealing with bullying in the trollosphere, Kristin Lamb has a fantastic post this week.)
Do you think I bought the book and, after enjoying it, gave it a good review? You betcha! (I also hit the “report abuse” button.) Plus I tweeted it to my followers and wrote an encouraging message to the author. Most humans are moved when we see a fellow human being persecuted. “
Anne, you share the same misapprehension as far too many authors – that reviews are meant for authors, and that criticism==abuse. Your ‘advice’ in the past has been less than helpful to authors (http://annerallen.blogspot.com…, and I would suggest this part of your post, and the whole of Point 6, show that you don’t get the reality of the reader-reviewer interaction.
In other words, you’re part of the problem. Why don’t you read some of the other blog posts about this site, instead of rattling off bad, harmful advice?
As I noted in my comment to Sarah, I have been on the wrong end of some crappy behaviour at Goodreads. But you know what? In almost every case, there’s a bloody authors behind those idjits, either directly, or encouraging, facilitiating or approving. Fantwits don’t get riled up on their own about an author’s reviews.
And much as I have been badly upset by some people’s actions at GR and elsewhere, guess what I have *not* done? Set up a site to out them, or posted their information online, or done anything other than complain to the site owner about apparent breaches of their TOS. Apart from the evilness of that ‘anti’ bullying site, it’s also a ridiculous overreaction – not surprising given the obviously unhinged minds behind it. They think it makes their objects of attack look bad. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I never for a moment thought the site was run by readers, but by the writers who didn’t like the reviews.
Now that they’ve been outed as unprofessional crybabies, they’ll serve themselves and their readers much better if they just stop now before their editors and publishers get wind of what asshattery they’re committing.
I have a solution to all our woes!!!
Follow these steps:
Unplug. Everything.
(Yes, turn off the phone… no your spouse/sibling/child won’t call in a panic and if they can’t handle their own junk by now… too darn bad!)
Go immediately to your local library.
(No, not the bookstore, they are trying to influence you with their evil end caps of pushiness!)
Move unerringly to your favorite section.
(This can be whatever you damn well feel like reading, from romance to knitting to KNITTING ROMANCE *there is such a thing I found it on Wednesday I was in AWE* or car repair or even children’s fiction… no one is going to stop you… unless you are naked… creepy.)
Grab whatever book tickles your fancy.
(Or fancies your tickle… oh my!)
Open book to random center page.
(You can open it to page 69 and giggle like a school girl, it is perfectly acceptable. The creepy old dude next to you is doing the same thing… NO DON’T MAKE EYE CONTACT WITH HIM ARRGGGGHHHH!!!!)
Read random center page.
Now 2 things can happen:
A: You LIKE what you read.
B: You do NOT like what you read.
If A happens, check out said book. Enjoy. Just enjoy. Without plugging in. Call your best pal if you need too but just ENJOY. Without the internet.
If B happens, put book back. IN THE CORRECT SPOT. Then try again until you achieve A. Sometimes this does not happen. That is OK. Do not panic or flail. The creepy old guy might think it’s a come on. Instead relax, take a walk, ignore the internet. At some point you’ll find a book, ON YOUR OWN WITHOUT REVIEWS, that will allow you to enjoy it without internet interaction. It will be a beautiful thing.
As a consumer, you are faced with a choice: are you a dog person or a cat person? If you shower praise and affection and attention onto pretty much everything you read/buy/eat/watch because you want to be “nice”, you’re like that relentlessly enthusiastic dog who loves its human and its tree and its squeaky toy equally, so the love you’re handing out by the bucketful means very little. On the other hand, you can choose to be a cat: you may spend quite a bit of time with your nose in the air, but *your* praise – since it’s so seldom bestowed – is rare and sincere and hard won. It doesn’t bother me that I’ve nitpicked plot holes and denounced tired character clichés in 75% of what I read and then rate d them as wastes of time because I know that, somewhere out there, ready to make me curl up purring in five star delight, is my next Courtney Milan novel, for example.
I know no author is going to revamp their next work based on a single paragraph I posted on Amazon or GoodReads, but if I can nudge just one fellow consumer away from one of the thousands of formulaic or just plain *awful* books published every year and towards something better…
Excellent post and discussion Sarah. Sorry i didn’t read all 52 comments but I tried. 🙂
I don’t like the idea of author’s responding to reviews generally. Some people are going to like you’re book and some not. I appreciate the negative and positive comments and weigh them. Since acquiring a Nook, I’ve been on a bit of a buying spree (whee!!) but lately have DNF’d a bunch of books I purchased without reading reviews. I can’t give away my money like that anymore, so I want the good and the bad. I don’t trust books with all positive reviews.
There’s an author who commented above who was concerned about a reviewer who misunderstood her book and she felt the need to respond back. I did not read review or response, but I will say (as someone who writes for a living) if another person misunderstands your writing perhaps your writing wasn’t clear. And if it’s only bad review, tough it out – that reviewer will look like they don’t know what they’re talking about. If more than one, perhaps your writing was not as clear as you thought it was.
I’ll admit I don’t have the patience to read through the site you mentioned, but I am extremely troubled by the bullying aspect of naming people. There is too much scary behavior in the world already. In MN we’re seeing an epidemic of suicides relating to bullying. It has no place in the reading world.
On the flip side, I will say at times I’d like to see less snark. Probably the Minnesotan in me, but I do tire of too much snark.
@Vassie ” I am mostly annoyed by negative reviews of the sort saying just “I hated it!! Avoid!!’ and giving zero constructive criticism. But I don’t call them ‘bullying’ I call them ‘spamming’. They annoy us sophisticated readers as well.”
I agree – I want good and bad reviews. Telling me to avoid without telling me why is not helpful. We all have different tastes and interests. Letting me know even what you don’t like is helpful but “hate it” is as bad as “love it” in terms of telling me something.
I have one friend, Ellen, who I trust implicitly with respect to books. The rest of you – I want to know what you are thinking.
I pride myself on writing good reviews—some are even positive reviews.
And that golden age of universal admiration totally passed me by—unless we are talking a parallel universe.
The best defense against speech that bothers you is more speech—so while the butthurt create a site to pretend to be readers, actual readers should keep the conversation alive and highlight the hypocrisy and the stupidity.
Streisand Effect—it works.
The streisand effect only works if we know who’s behind this. We can suspect very strongly, but at the moment, the damage is being done to the victims of this crap, and possibly to the authors they recommend who *aren’t* badly behaving authors.
The best thing we can do is find out who’s behind this and *stop* them. There are too many morons who would love to hurt people like Ridley and Kat and will gladly scoop up any information about them with a spoon. I know – I’ve been on the wrong end of this.
I’ve made my strong suspicions clear on my blog. If anyone has any proof, they should make it known so this site can be removed. Obviously complaints to Godaddy and WordPress are having no effect.
No. What Sarah and others are saying is that authors participate at their own risk—which is why most companies that put out a product have customer service dealing with complaints. And when customer service fucks up, the world hears about it.
When an author chooses to participate in conversations, s/he has the choice to be professional or a dipshit. Reaction to his/her participation will follow suit.
Two quick examples: Daisy Dexter Dobbs comment on Karen Scott’s review of one of her books (here) and Carla Cassidy reaction in this very blog (here).
See, and this is why you’re my hero.
What’s really sad, to me, is that this seems to steal some of the weight from the “bully” label. The more I see people apply a powerful word like “bully” to mean “someone said something I disagree with,” the weaker it makes the word, and the less likely people are to take it seriously.
The more eyes looking at the site, the better the chances of finding out who is behind it.
No. No. Wrong. The person revealing the real life identifies of on-line people is the bully.
I’ve spent most of the last week following the hideous, misogynist reactions to Anita Sarkeesian’s video project. It’s been quite educational, seeing what anonymous people are willing to expend their time and energy on, trying to silence people they disagree with. Doxxing and threats are what the bullies do.
If you ever find you are:
– threatening to or releasing personal information about your enemy to the internet
– while keeping your own identity secret
YOU. ARE. IN. THE. WRONG.
Excellent post Sarah. I agree 100% x a million.
Isn’t one of the main points behind the GR bullying site that authors can’t respond to anything in a review/blogpost (including correcting factual inaccuracies) without being slapped down, as happens time and time again?
There’s even a prime example of that here. In comment 34 Sarah Wynde says:
I have a recent one-star review on my first book that reads, in its totality, “Want to hear the excruciating story of the longest wait ever for a married couple to kiss? This is your book. ” Okay, nobody’s married in my book. Like, no one. Not a single married couple. And my heroine seduces the hero before they’ve even gone on a first date. (She’s a little impulsive.) I’m pretty sure the author of that review has posted at least the content of her review to the wrong book, if not the rating. Do I ignore it?”
She then adds:
“Can I really not respond to that one-star reviewer for fear of being added to a list of “author temper tantrums?” Because that, to me, seems a lot like giving in to bullying.”
In response, in comment 47 Ann Sommerville says:
“A 1 star review is not bullying. And until you realise that, you are going to look like an idiot when you talk about this. I suggest you stop before you do your reputation harm.”
Now unless I’ve read it completely wrong, Sarah Wynde is not talking about the 1 star review being bullying, she’s talking about the fact that she feels she can’t respond to the glaring factual inaccuracies in the review. Therefore IMO Ann Sommerville’s comment is ill-informed and really quite rude.
“Sarah Wynde is not talking about the 1 star review being bullying, she’s talking about the fact that she feels she can’t respond to the glaring factual inaccuracies in the review. “
What, in your opinion, is Sarah calling ‘bullying’ in her original post? She’s directly referencing the review. Even a mistaken review is not bullying. Even an *abusive* review is not bullying. Did you not read my comment about the difference?
“Ann Sommerville’s comment is ill-informed and really quite rude.”
I don’t give a shit whether you think I’m rude, but I am *not* ill-informed. Not only have I been watching this author-reviewer war for *years* (and participating in many battles with badly behaving reviewers) but as a self-published author, I am one of the people directly affected when SP authors go on a tear about reviewers. No one says when Tess Gerritsen or the like makes an arse of herself, “oh, that’s it – no more Big Six published authors for me”. But every time a self-published author makes a fool of themselves over reviews, you will get readers and bloggers and reviewers swearing off SP books for life.
I’m not ill-informed. You’re just a bloody nitwit. I have had it up to here with people making this false equivalency argument. It’s hurting readers, it’s hurting authors. And you are giving aid and comfort to some seriously deranged people by pushing this line.
After reading the “Stop the GR Bullies” site, I’m flabbergasted. My personal favorite is a complaint that an author felt so badly about poor reviews that she stopped writing. Well, that happens. Perhaps she’s really, really bad at writing. I’ve read some books that have left me wondering how it’s possible for such a horrible writer to be published, and I shouldn’t have to pretend they were wonderful in order to avoid hurting the author’s feelings. The complaints are unintentionally funny to the extent of being reminiscent of an Onion article.
In addition to whiny, the site has an astonishingly misogynistic feel. Several GR members who are targeted are bashed for being stay at home moms. Granted, when a site is set up for the exclusive purpose of bullying people on the internet, it should come as no surprise when they take their cues directly from the Good Old Boys’ club, but still: wow.
The best reviews are those that clearly express what a reader liked and /or disliked about a book. Some do this better than others but all deserve the space to express their points of view. With that said, we’re all familiar with those that seem to cross the line of civility and seem to be personal in its focus, either to the author or to other readers who had a different point of view. You can choose to ignore or engage, and the operative word is choice.
There are reviewers who like to be provocative in their discourse, using humor or snark to emphasize their points. They can often come across as a bit cruel or unfeeling to the writer and there is an audience for these type of reviews. If you’re not it, than move on. I personally don’t get anything from them and exercise my choice to just skip them. I respect their right of expression and feel good about my choosing to ignore. The absence of civility in imparting an opinion doesn’t appeal to me so I choose to move on. Again, I like that I’m given that choice.
One more point….
I had an author comment to me about a negative review she received on GRs. I read the review and was impressed that the reviewer was really detailed about what bothered her about the story. I thought that was a gift not only to the author but to other potential readers. I advised the author to be grateful for the feedback.
I don’t mind having an author interact with me, especially if they’re looking for clarification. However, I’m not certain that’s always the best thing to do. You should first be sure you’re able to distinguish between those that will have meaningful dialogue and those that can be a lightning rod for something more ominous.
GR bullies? Setting up another website to bully the bullies seems to be a contradiction of sorts. The best way to handle perceived bullies is to just leave them alone, not highlight them. Most of the reviewers who cross the line into personal attacks don’t seem to be attracting potential readers but others who share their perspective. Let them have their space to revel as potential readers will move on to get more balanced analyses.
You have to keep in mind that we’re now living in an era where the newest crop of adults (myself included) were raised to believe that we are all special butterflies who can succeed at anything. We took every kind of class and joined every kind of club, and were given ribbons just for showing up to the soccer game. Criticism was not allowed. The mantra was “You tried your best and that was good enough.” The idea that you could write a book and not have people like it is unthinkable, because you wrote it, you worked hard on it, and well, you’re a special butterfly who gets prizes for making an appearance. Think 50 Shades of Grey. “This is amazing! You should totally get it published!” Can’t find a publisher? Clearly they don’t know what they’re missing (I admit sometimes they don’t). You should publish it yourself! I think sites like GR bullies are a symptom of taking all that specialness too far, of not accepting that not everyone is going to be wowed by you and your hard work all the time, and that sometimes your best isn’t good enough. Sucks, but there is so much more growth to be had from honest and constructive criticism than there is from “OMG, this book was amazing!”
I am always hesitant to post a negative review because I know the author has worked hard and although I may not have liked the book, others have. It just wasn’t for me. I did have to finally post a review about a book from a series I started out loving and then slowly (or not so slowly) got more and more disappointing. I finally had to agree with the other reviewers that the book *cough*Dead Reckoning*cough* was just so disappointing and the character’s interaction fell flat. I just couldn’t let it go by without expressing myself.
Anything in the public eye – art, music, etc. is not going to be universally loved by all.
It makes a mockery out of what real bullying is and the effect it has that these writers behind this awful GR bullying website equate bad reviews with bullying. It makes me sad. And of course it’s ironic that they are bullying the people for giving them bad reviews.
Lucy! A fellow Cheeze-It lover! They have comforted me through many a trial and tribulation. I believe they should be a food group all on their own.
Excellent post Sarah, and excellent responses as well. A most wonderful way to start my day along with my cup-o-joe. I love all the smartness I find here in the bitchery!
I call it Special Snowflake Syndrome.
I recently had a conversation with someone whom I had met approximately two minutes earlier that went something like this:
Special Snowflake: “I DEMAND RESPECT!”
Me: “For showing up? Fuck off.”
Special Snowflake: *pyrotechnic hysterics to demonstrate her worthiness of respect*
We have culturally abandoned the concept of merit-based reward and replaced it with a delusion that everybody is equal and fabulous.
The only solution is for everybody to go tell each of their children right now that a sibling is prettier/smarter/more talented and to GET OVER IT, and maybe 20 years from now we’ll have a generation that doesn’t believe universal adoration is a constitutional right.
My favorite Special Snowflake: The fresh out of school new hire who went on and on during a company meeting about how hard she works and gets no recognition except the occasional “Thank you”. I put up my hand and said “I’m sorry, am I misunderstanding something? Do you not get a paycheck like the rest of us?”
As far as the post? Excellent presentation as always, Sarah. Well thought out, cogent and timely. Oh, the everlasting irony.
My opinion is mine, and I’m as entitled to it as others are to theirs. If you don’t agree with me, I’m up for a civil debate. CIVIL DEBATE. But you’d better have something better than “You’re wrong you big mean poopoo head.” because believe me, I’ll have an open mind, but I’ll be armed for bear.
I think the issue comes when writers can go online and read all these reviews. Of course your feelings will be hurt if someone hated your work – it’s something you worked really hard on, and were proud enough of to put it out there for the whole world to see! However, this does not mean that they are justified in retaliating with hurtful language.
I’ve taken creative writing classes, and it’s scary to read your work out loud and then have people comment on it. Critiques were always honest, and therefore invaluable when it came time to write something new. We all learn from our mistakes, but if no one tells us we made one, and then how will we learn?
When I review something I try to be nice, since I never want to hurt anyone’s feelings…but sometimes something is so awful that one can’t help but tease it a bit! I think people need to learn to laugh at themselves, and get over it when they fail. Just get back up and try again!
I think the greatest irony of all is that the GR bullies apparently do not understand just how counter-productive their little website is. It is amazing, really, but apparently they do not know the (perhaps) most important thing about romance readers: that they read the reviews and they read the books because they love romance.
Every reader knows that no book is perfect, but we keep reading them anyway. Because we love them.
We are grateful for reviews. Because we love the books, and a review brings the books we love closer to us.
It does not matter whether the review is positive or negative – although I myself prefer negative, because those are usually more honest. I do not mind hearing about flaws, real or imagined. Because, of course, I love romance books, flaws and all.
Just like every other romance reader.
I would keep reading even if I never saw a positive review, ever, again.
Reviews never stopped anyone from reading a book. On the contrary: they encourage readers who are already inclined to read, and occasionally they convert non-readers.
As the old saying goes: “there is no such thing as bad publicity”.
And these people actually think they need protection from…. their own publicity. I think that would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
Again I say, oh the irony!
Most of the big sellers and certainly the authors I am passionate about have reviews running the gamut from 1 to 5 stars. They inspire emotion, you love them, hate them but react to them.
When I have hundreds of reviews after a book I write, and they are like that, I will feel I’ve written well enough to truly touch people. But for now, I’ve been a reader, a reviewer, and author and an editor. I love this industry and am grateful for the time a reviewer puts into reading my books thoughtfully and share their thoughts!
So I’m a lemming and can’t stop looking at this train wreck. It appears this morning that the “bully” site posted a Q&A interview.
It was mostly disturbing and hypocritical. But hey, what do you expect from PSYCHO-LOGIC. I was most struck by one quote in particular:
“Sometimes reviews are constructive, if done properly, and can help an author improve his/her craft.”
Excuse me, WTF? If done properly?
Obviously this group feels that reviews must contain some kind of constructive criticism to be proper. This reminded me of a post on Dear Author last month about paying customers not being beta readers.
http://dearauthor.com/features…
I don’t think book reviewers are under any obligation to be constructive. Reviews aren’t the same as constructive criticism. If an author is “work-shopping” his/her book using Amazon and Goodreads reviews, well maybe THAT is the problem.
I’ve seen a lot of commentary about “reviewers not being professional” but really, what is professional about publishing what is tantamount to a draft?
Agreed, Renee. In my workplace, I’m professionally obligated to provide my underlings with constructive criticism. GoodReads is not my workplace. I’m not in charge of anyone else’s performance; I’m not accountable for what they do; I’m not paid. No such obligations exists.
I don’t think this is actually about reviews, to be honest. If it were, why would I suddenly be a target now when I haven’t been on Goodreads since Diablo III launched in mid-May?
What this actually is about is misogyny and patriarchy. This is less about our reviews and more about our willingness to speak up about issues and that we do so in ways that aren’t “nice.” We’re bad at being women, and they’re punishing us for it (or trying to, anyways. I find it kind of funny, actually, and they have my thanks for publishing a good photo of me.)
You see, while I haven’t been on Goodreads, I have been online. I’ve been my usual provocative self on Twitter and various blogs, calling the prats out on their BS. But there’s this lingering idea that women should be “nice,” and that “if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.” Since I’ve thumbed my nose at that nonsense, people want to teach me a lesson for getting all uppity and forgetting my place. They want to cow me into being a passive little woman, into fitting a very narrow mold of traditional femininity. (They also tut-tutted at what an ungracious, bitter cripple I was. So add “disabled person lacking deference” to my list of crimes.)
It’s not a coincidence that the GRBullies’ targets, Laci Green and Anita Sarkeesian are all female. Society doesn’t like confident women.