Smart Bitches, Trashy Books

“What I want to know is: how many published authors—especially authors who write genre fiction—have advanced degrees in, say, English, Linguistics or Fine Arts?”

Jennifer. Crusie.  (Who rocks.)

Wow, what a crazy-cool variety of responses, although if an “advanced” college degree is a prereq for opinions to posess worthiness, my little BFA falls short of the mark.  Even with six minors.  Anyhow, post why (or why not) you like the book, and you’ll always get my attention.  And yes, the opinion of someone whose tastes seem to parallel mine can influence my future purchases.  Before stumbling across this blog, I’d never heard of:  Jennifer Crusie, Emma Holly, or Judith Ivory, to name a few I’ve tried and enjoyed lately.  I’ve been surrounded by plenty of the “don’t romance novels cause sweaty, hairy palms and get an automatic expulsion from MENSA” attitude, and it’s great to have somewhere to go, where romance reading does not automatically equal ignorant and inbred.  So, I guess my point is some “non-professional” reviews hold more sway with me than the official literary opinion.  I don’t always agree with Sarah & Candy’s reviews, but I always get a good idea of whether a book they review (good or bad) is something that I will like.
Having said all that, I think MJD needs a pair of moose antlers.  I had a college friend who no one could ever tell if he was serious or tongue-in-cheek, and (like the Monty Python “When I’m wearing the moose antlers, I’m dictating” bit) he often had to explain that he was kidding, but would put his hands up and say “moose antlers!” when we missed it.  Cleared things up nicely.
I said all that to say this: I don’t have a cool graphic for you all, but SB Candy and SB Sarah, I dub thee “Worthy of Reviewing Books for My Personal Perusal”, and when I take over the world, we’ll make the title global.

I’m a published author and I used to review. I stopped because I was reviewing like an author, and not a reader. Readers are, by definition of the word, the only ones who can (in my opinion) give a fair review. If I take off my author hat, I can try to give a review, but I find myself influenced by three things: editing, grammar, and if I know the author or not. (mostly yes, it’s a small world) I tried to give fair reviews, but I caught myself being either too glowing or too critical. Authors make terrible reviewers. They are often asked to make blurbs to put on other author’s books so that readers can recognise names and see praise, and maybe this has led some of them to believe they can review all books.
This is the advice I got from a very big name author when my first book came out. He said to me, “Whatever you do, don’t read your reviews. Get out of the habit of looking for them. Know that you will get good reviews and bad - and the good ones will be uplifting and the bad will be crushing…And none of them matter.”
I didn’t listen. I read my reviews and send off thank you letters to reviewers who stay up late at night to finish a job they signed up to do for free - but this is true - be it good or bad, I appreciate the reviewer’s effort. I don’t think an author has the same outlook as a reader when it comes to reading for pure pleasure and then giving an opinion.
So I am at odds with MJD’s opinion. But I won’t attack her for it. Because in my book, everyone is entitled to their OWN OPINION.

Degree: electrical engineering
First Novel: “Harvey & Eck” Zumaya Publications, 2005

I actually ran a contest on my blog to find Regular Folk reviewers/bloggers to read my book and tell the people what they think. Found three. They are in the process of reading the book now. One of the reviewers posted an HNT snap of himself reading my book. It about made me want to die laughing. Whoever thought I’d see a guy who was not my husband doing that? And with my book no less?

I am covering their every murmur on my blog, when I’m not duly recording lesbian dreams, that is.

of course authors are nervous about the fact that anyone who can read a book can also write one. Why do you think so many of them get snarky about that write a book in a month thing? Nothing scarier.

There is the emotional bushwa (sorry, a professional term. Every profession has its jargon) of having a book published that actually makes it harder for me to be a good reviewer now. I am far more acutely aware of the person behind the book and know that all that talk about “it’s not you, it’s the book” is just blather (another pro-writing term).

Jenny Crusie does indeed have a Ph.D.  She read hundreds of romance novels to talk about the gender differences in writing by men vs. writing by women.  Then decided she could write the damn things better than those she’d read, chucked academia (good for her) and became a best-selling author.

There’s a few more out there, but none with her success.  I’d like to be one, but that means I have to get off my ass and actually start writing.

Actually I thought MJD’s notes in RTB are great. Never mind that some contradict others—they still all make sense. She does eventually make it clear that everything she says is of automatic moose antler-hood (thanks for that Shari).

This is such an interesting topic and so much more interesting than my work today that I’ve decided to break my silence and pitch in.

My beat-the-new-year-blues treat to myself was a copy of Judith McNaught’s latest, Every Breath You Take.  When I had finished I scanned a few sites on the web, curious to hear what other readers thought of it.  One of the sites was JM’s own bulletin board, and I was fascinated to read her post about reviews on Amazon and the effect they had on her: http://bbs.simonsays.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=020151;p=8

Fascinated because she touches on one of my pet peeves: people who complain badly.  Your airline loses your bags.  Fine.  Write a letter of complaint, register your dissatisfaction, get compensation, whatever.  Do not shout at the poor girl at the counter when you arrive at your destination but your bags don’t.  It wasn’t her fault and you shouldn’t take out your anger (however justified) on her.  Similarly, I get incensed by reviews which focus on the author and his or her failings in a very personal way, instead of focusing on the book. 

No, I don’t believe only other authors’ opinions should count, any more than I think that I can’t comment on the work of my doctor, lawyer, airline etc etc just because I’m not a published author or qualified physician, attorney, pilot (or all four, like the guy in that show, what was it called … Pretender?).  These people wouldn’t have jobs if it weren’t for patients, clients, passengers and, oh yeah, readers.  But I think comments should focus on the service offered, not the person offering it. 

[steps off soapbox]

About the author’s having PhDs. I believe that Eloisa James also holds one as well.

LV Vicki

May I humbly propose a plan for the “advanced review system of expertise”. The authority of reviewers would be ranked according to their qualification level, results and calibre of institution attended. An accurate and impartial assessment of each individual’s competence to review could thus be made and assigned a precise grade on a standardized numeric scale from 0-9. The potential reviewer’s field of research would be independently validated by no less than three impartial authorities who would assign a specialism category indicated by a four letter code. Reviewers would only be entitled to comment upon aspects of a novel which lie within their officially recognised area of expertise. Thus, an associate Professor (grade 8) of Feminist Liberation Literature would receive the ranking Fell8.

Some potential names of candidates follow:

Eloisa James (Professor of English Literature)
Michelle Jaffe (Phd in comparative literature)
Stephanie Laurens (Phd in Biochemistry)
Alison Scott (Phd in American Studies)
Catherine Asaro (Phd in Chemical Physics)
Nita Abrams (Phd subj. undetermined)

Following a review by the appeals committee, the rejection of Julia Quinn’s application to review Medical romances has been upheld on the grounds that she did not complete her medical studies at Yale. However the committee has decided that in view of the distinguished reputation of her undergraduate institution and her final Art History exam results she is entitled to provide reviews of level 0 (“informed but non-authoritative commentary”) in the field of Dance Imagery in Lumanist Design (Dild0). Furthermore, given the outstanding quality of her presentation, if Ms. Quinn completes her studies at the appropriate level, we would welcome the resubmission of her application to be upgraded to a specialism in Techniques in Tonsillitis Treatment (Titt1)

I think it is clear that the advanced review system of expertise (aka A.R.S.E) will provide a satisfactory alternative to the inexpert value judgements of the current arbitrary system of reviews which is totally subject to the whims of personal taste.

LOL—A.R.S.E gets my vote!

For the record, I have degrees in Theatre Arts, Education, and Educational Administration. And what do I do in life? Teach English and write erotica!

What DON’T I do? Review books. You guys have a thankless job…no matter what you write about a book, SOMEONE’s bound to disagree with you. That, however, is exactly why I LIKE reviews of my books. Both the good and the bad, and I read every one of them I can find. Sadistic? Sometimes (have you read one of my books?

If you put something out for other people to read you should expect they’re going to have an opinion on it, and this opinion may not always be favorable.  If a review points out that your plot has a lot of loose ends or the historical license you took knocked the reviewer right out of the story—well, that’s something to remember and watch out for in the next story.

I’m not a published author, I just write ‘foefiction’ which makes fun of a long-running comic strip.  All my ‘reviews’ are from readers and I appreciate the constructive criticism I occasionally get from them.  Who better to assess it than the audience it’s written for?

If all an author wants is applause and praise then s/he should self-publish and limit readership to his/her mom and best friends. 

LC

I’m all about the “moose antlers” idea.  I thought MJD’s comments on the other blogs were hilarious and I felt like a lot of the people who were getting genuinely upset with her were SO totally missing the point of what (I thought) she was trying to say.

I believe Laura Kinsale also has an advanced degree in chemical engineering, and Diana Gabaldon has a PhD in Biology.

So we’re all bright gals.  Me, I only have a BS degree (most appropriate), but I review books under my birth name for BooksForum at ForumsAmerica.  I don’t have a PhD in history but I did minor in it and I have always loved it, so it majorly annoys me as a reviewer when people get it wrong.  Not little things—I don’t care what kind of bells camels wore on their harnesses in 17th C. Persia—but big things like repeatedly misusing forms of address in a Regency era novel, or having the medieval “Robin Hood” type character wear black silk for her nightly forays scaling the walls of the castle and distributing gold coins to the peasantry.

I review as a reader. I expect authors to pay attention and not yank me out of the story by jumping POV all over the place and I expect them to do their research. I expected this long before I put hands to keyboard and wrote my first novel.  I am willing to suspend my standards and disbelief only so far for the sake of the story.  After a certain point, the story alone may not be enough if the book is rife with errors and writing problems.

The only time I gnash my teeth over reviews of my novels is when the reviewer gets it wrong.  One kept referring to Smuggler’s Bride being set in colonial Florida, when it was set in 1843 Territorial Florida.  Florida was never a colony of the US.

But she liked the book, so I cut her some slack.  Not everyone’s a history wonkette.[g]

All I have to say on this subject(mostly because I’m burnt out on talking about reviews so I have nothing stunningly brilliant to add—not that I ever did *snort*) is…two days later and I’m still inspiring. I feel all warm and gooey inside. Someone hold me.

O/T:

Degree: laziness
First Novel: “500 Perfectly Good Excuses to Justify Your Laziness” Self-Publishing-R-Us Publications, 2010

Just wanting to say that EvilAuntiePril should have a blog of her own. My mouse pointer is hovering over the Bookmark button for the day her blog is born.

Yours,
Maili the Temporarily Braindead Sloth

If advanced degrees in literature, etc. were required to write reviews, I think most romance writers would be S.O.L., since I think very few academic-types respect this genre.  Or, at least, the ones I’ve spoken to don’t - their heads are generally too far up their own asses.

I have a high-school diploma stuffed in a drawer somewhere—-probably with plot notes scribbled on the back.  That’s it for me.  (Which probably comes as no surprise to my editors.)

And MJD could sleep with my husband and I’d still read her books. Hell, I’ll trade him for MJD arcs.

And I’m still suffering from PTSD from the last time I dared have an opinion, so I’m not even going to comment on that.  *takes pills*

Oh how I love my Auntie Peril.

Hey, Reese, some of us academics not only like romances, but founded our careers on the wonderful things.  We’re not all bad, just mostly bad.  But I don’t think academics like/dislike romances at a greater percentage than the normal population—rather, their “authority” is given more weight when they say something about romances.

It occurs to me that people are often talking apples & oranges when it comes to reviews.  There are Book Reviews, which are serious analyses of a book’s literary merit.  And sure, I think you probably should have some sort of credentials for those, if only to get the jargon right. 

And then there are reviews for readers, which are less about literary merit (though that might be a factor), and more about why a reader might or might not want to read a book. 

Kind of like the difference between a news article and a letter to the editor on the same subject. 

Or not.

Maili!  Where have you been?  You post, then disappear again!

Does this mean I’m not allowed to gush about Kinsale or incite the hatred of The Entire Internet by ripping on Gabaldon anymore, at least until I get a couple more degrees?

Bummer. Fellow readers seem to genuinely love booktalk that has actual passion in it.

Jenny Crusie does indeed have a Ph.D.  She read hundreds of romance novels to talk about the gender differences in writing by men vs. writing by women.  Then decided she could write the damn things better than those she’d read, chucked academia (good for her) and became a best-selling author.

Actually, she’s only ABD, which, for you lucky non-academics, means that she did all the work up to her dissertation, but has not completed it, and is therefore, not yet a Ph.D.  I had a number of friends who got stalled at the dissertation stage and left academia without their degree.  Always seemed a huge shame to me, because the dissertation should be the fun part of grad school (okay, it wasn’t for me, but only because I was so burned out I was writing to simply not let me diss chair down); it’s the one moment you really have the chance to say what you want and get a degree for doing so.

As to MJD’s comments, I felt she was unspeakably rude to Karen Scott, which created an ugly edge to her humor.  I have not even been motivated to buy her last few books, not just because they’ve become so thin, inside and out. 

Not that anyone cares, but here’s my response to Angie’s excellent column (am I alone in feeling that too often RTB is a little vanilla?):

OK, you’re talking about the review for Wolf Tales, so I have to tell you that Kate specifically said she didn’t care if people posted good or bad reviews, she just didn’t want that review to be the only one people saw. She did not ask for people who hadn’t read the book to make something up.

I haven’t read Wolf Tales so I don’t have an opinion on the book, but those are the facts on the Amazon review situation. She didn’t ask for praise.

But why is it the author’s place to determine WHAT she gets on Amazon? Once a book moves into the public realm, it becomes a public concern (not exactly “property” because of copyright laws). And this is exactly what the author wants, right? She wants her book to circulate publicly, to be available publicly, to be read publicly, as widely as possible. But only on certain terms — right??

Now I understand and am frustrated over the fact that authors are, to some degree, constrained by their publishers in certain ways; that many have no creative input, for example, when it comes to cover design or marketing strategies. But that’s also part of the contracting relationship between publisher and author.

Regarding the relationship between author and reader, however, the contract is more informal, but perhaps more important as an author’s longevity in the industry goes. I read Keishon’s review and the blog entry explaining the request to have it deleted. While not one of the page long reviews some of us obsessives are wont to write, it was, IMO, a reasonable review, which, contrary to many on Amazon, actually presented concrete reasons for the reader’s dislike. Not that she cares, but the author’s interference in the reader reviewing process made it VERY unlikely I will EVER pick up one of her books, no matter how many positive reviews she gets.

As to the issue of who should be able to review, I’m confused: I have a Ph.D. in literature, am a professional writer, and read Romance for fun. Do I have the right to review Romance in any legitimate way? Or do I need to keep my concerns about increasingly shorter hardbacks (with hardback prices) being published these days, for example, to myself?

OMG MAILI POSTED A COMMENT. I feel like I’ve seen a vision of the Virgin of Guadalupe. Though given this site, perhaps Bitchbag of Guadalupe might be more appropriate? Hmmmm.

I second her opinion about EAP needing her own blog, by the way. As it is, I’m thisclose to mailing her checks and naked pictures of hot soccer players to ensure she keeps posting regularly on this forum.

I hate to say this, but all those authors whose advanced degrees are in non-Englishy/Languagey/Artsy Fartsy crap? Do not count. We’re looking for relevancy as well as expertise. Laura Kinsale and Stephanie Laurens, for example, cannot count as authorities on books. Catherine Asaro gets a break for her SF novels, though.

And Beth: according to some authorities, as an unwashed heathen (OK, I’m pretty sure you wash—with lavender-scented bubble thingums, even) who not only has no advanced degrees but who has the temerity to review books while unabashedly trying to write your own, the circle in hell reserved for you is especially foul. Like, forced-to-watch-Ann-Coulter-suck-Joseph-McCarthy’s-dick-twenty-four-seven foul. (Or would that be the other way around? Somebody pointed out to me the other day that she has an Adam’s apple. Eeesh.)

Shannon: DO TELL about the time you got PTSD for disagreeing with someone. Was it on this forum? Or somewhere else? *ears perked for good gossip*

And on to the subject of reviews, and tangentially, MJD:

Yes, many reviews suck. Sturgeon’s Law holds steady for this particular field, as it does for so many others. But that doesn’t mean that MJD’s very sweeping initial claim is any less silly and shitful for it, simply because the logic doesn’t hold up. I don’t need to be a mechanic to assess when the brakes on my car have failed, just as I don’t have to be an author to point out that every sentence really doesn’t need its own ellipsis. No, really… it doesn’t. I agree with other things she said subsequently, but her initial comment was still an eyeroller.

I admit it, I have become addicted to reading reviews on Amazon.  I don’t know anybody with the same taste in books as me, and I have this compulsive need to discuss things that I read (I think it’s b/c I’m a librarian/former English major), so I started reading Amazon reviews primarily after reading the book to see what other people thought.  I continue to do so, because it’s a freaking hoot.  I spend my time giggling and sneering, “Did this person read the same book as me?” If I have to read something along the lines of “It was no Anita Blake…” again, I may pull my hair out, but really so much of the commentary, positive or negative, is crap, and I wasn’t even aware of the games people play with it. My actual point is that reviews are for readers (and potential readers), and except for the brilliant EvilAuntiePeril, little credit was given to us readers for having enough brainpower to distinguish between crap and an actual well-thought out review.  It’s fun to compare and contrast but that’s about it.  It is up to each review reader to make an informed decision, and hopefully they will not be put off because a book is not as good as “Desire’s Blossom, the best book, evah.”  Had to stick that in there.

And on the question of whether or not only writers should review, who decides who is a writer.  What you’ve published, the content, the length?  Who put it out?  I was published in my high school literary mag.  I also have had reviews published in School Library Journal, a national publication.  Am I enough of a ‘writer’ to review other’s works?  How about all of those writing blogs? Couldn’t they be considered writers of a sort? Ergo, they are qualified to review.  Whatever.  Oh well, I’m off to write some mean reviews on my own blog.  Kidding,kidding…

My stats…I have an Associates in Computer Informations Systems and I’ve been a professional editor since age 15, when I would proof my classmate’s papers for five bucks each. My husband has a Masters in History and works as a security guard. So much for advanced degrees.

I tell my authors all the time, a review is an opinion. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and the First Amendment allows them to publically express it. Authors are people, too, so they can review if they want.

A well-done review, whether good or bad, tells exactly WHY it made their panties wet or caused them to yarf Corn Nuts, citing specific examples. Then the authors know what they did wrong or right, and the publishers can go, “Oops,” and fix it. Those are what I expect to see from professional review sites.

Anyone can review. But if you are reviewing for a professional group, you should be a professional, not just say ‘This book sucked monkey butt’ and feel that’s a sufficent review. I think this sort of thing has really cast a shadow over reviews in general.

Just one short peep:

Even though a writer may not have a degree, they may have almost completed the equivalent of a degree by being a voracious researcher. There is no way to quantify that, of course; but writers (who are any good) tend to be research mavens. Authors who do their research should count, IMHO. Of course, one would have to take points off for the nonacademic nature of the research and the tendency to call oneself an expert after a lot of lay research…

*ducks to avoid flung objects*

Okay, I have an M.F.A in Creative Writing and went to a snooty boarding school.  Can I please please be a member of A.R.S.E?

Seriously though, I remember having a similar conversation about qualifications at RWA-Dallas.  My response to the should have/shouldn’t have quandary was, unless asked, I don’t bring up my educational background, cuz to be perfectly frank, getting the M.F.A was fine, helpful, fun even, but it doesn’t really teach you how to write love scenes that will curl toes or how to create worlds that would make Frank Herbert say, “holy shit that’s cool.”  Uh, as soon as he came back from the dead.

I was taught to write lit; dead white men’s lit.  To do this we read dead white men’s lit (any other kind of lit, i.e. African-American, Asian-American, etc were electives and not part of the required curriculum).  I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that those mentioned with PhD’s in some sort of literature were taught to analyze dead white men’s lit.  Which sort of makes us unqualified to review romance, I guess.

It’s all too apples and oranges, too subjective and too illogical.  Do you honestly think that doctors being reviewed don’t have good buddies on the review committee who make certain allowances based on how hard med school is or how many kids that doc has headed for college?  Does that make the reviewer any less or more qualified?

Besides all of that, some of the most thoughtful, well-written, spot-on reviews I’ve ever read were reader reviews.  Naturally Smart Bitches are included in this category.

I really don’t think that some arbitrary degree would make a reviewer “professional.”  I also think that discounting good criticism because it wasn’t given by a pro is downright dangerous.

All we can do is what we all probably do already, which is to take note of who consistently writes reviews that don’t stink of a back-alley cash pay off and rely on their opinion.  Ultimately it’s not qualifications but reputation that will, and oftentimes do determine who has the right to say shit to us.

Crap, I’m missing General Hospital fucking around with you bitches.

I think that only good writers get to write reviews too. And by good writers, I mean, only those who have sold over 31 millions copies worldwide. Its not the Oscars.  I think we should go for mass market appeal as what dictates who is a good author.

As for MJD, her distinctive snarky voice is a one note wonder.  Meaning, all her books are the same.  I stopped buying her when she started writing 100 page books and started selling them for $17.95.

Yes, I read my reviews.  Yes, I prefer the ones that gush.  I dislike the ones I don’t think do justice to the book.  Yes, I’m a writer who not only studies other people’s work, but have some pretty high standards anymore about what constitutes is a good book or bad book.

I was a reviewer once, after I was published.  I did three reviews.  But in the last I danced around a book that I thought was predictable.  I decided I couldn’t do reviews and be honest.  So I’ll talk about books to my friends, and may say a few things about the Huge Stars, and will be anonymous in judging published contests, but you won’t ever see me doing stars at amazon or anywhere else.

As for being a writer.  Good reviews, fan mail and everything else is a DRUG.  If you get three emails today that say they like your book, you need four tomorrow that say your book was the best they’d ever read and they sleep with it under their pillow.  You CAN’T depend on this drug.

The only true validation for an author must be an inner validation—that you wrote the book of your heart the best you could with the resources you had at the time.  So I try my best (and fail) to practice this inner validation thing.

And, yeah, this will be cross blogged in comments.

Robin

So, after skimming the various comments on RTB, I can only wonder:  why the hell is so much time and effort being spent by all to state how little they care about reviews???

And MJD can grow a spine - misunderstanding my ass.

Something is very, very wrong with me.  I thought MJD was hilarious.  Was Karen Scott upset?  My god!  I must have the “Brad Pitt Missing Compassion Gene” disease.

So EvilAuntiePeril is collecting resumes? Okay. Here goes: B.A., dual degree, English literature and journalism; M.F.A., creative writing. One book published. Grants & scholarships & residencies (including one in which my writing quarters had a positively sybaritic High Victorian bathroom—well, damn it, even temporary possession of such a bathroom establishes my creds, if nothing else). Twelve years as an editor and professional writer. (Which means healthcare was included.)

I glance at the Amazon reviews out of curiosity, but usually if I’ve gone to the trouble of searching for the book, I already know if I am going to buy it or not. Amazon reviews don’t sway me, either way. I particularly treasure the most psychotic or paranoid ramblings, seeing them almost as a form of folk art. Sort of like graffiti, which did eventually get recognized as a serious art form, after all. I’m delighted when some reviews seem really well written and well thought out, and I always wonder who that person was & why he or she cared enough to commit their time & effort into composing a pretty decent review. I think sometimes it’s done for love ... of books, I mean ... which makes it sacred, in a way. Credentialed or uncredentialed.

What I don’t understand about Romance is why some people within it are always asking why it’s not taken seriously, and its good writers aren’t praised enough. But then, if someone does try to take Romance seriously—by opening up a critical discussion by writing reviews or discussing books as if they really meant something more than the local weekly advertising supplement in the newspaper—everyone screams “No fair!” like it’s a mean girl thing to do.

Shannon: DO TELL about the time you got PTSD for disagreeing with someone. Was it on this forum? Or somewhere else? *ears perked for good gossip*

I’m so crushed that you don’t remember my managing to cross both the Smart Bitches and la familia Goldberg with one post by giving my opinion on romance writers reviewing other romance writers.  Strangely enough my opinion was being changed by intelligent conversation on the matter until I was called a fucktard.  The “Bite my ass” response to being referred to as such is damn near Pavlovian. But the Smart Bitch’s role in that was limited to my not having expressed something clearly, causing it to piss you off, but then it was all cleared up.

The point…did I have a point…oh—that I studiously avoided the entire brouhaha for good reason. But I do believe that anybody who reads a book is qualified to review it.  Do I have to be a TV writer to tell you I think the show “Surface” sucks? No. Now, what if TV Guide says Surface sucks?  Or one of his colleagues says it sucks?  All three of are qualified to say it sucks.  But the writers/etc of that show get to dismiss them as they please.  Are they more apt to accept the declaration of suckiness from TV Guide or a fellow TV guy?  Probably.  But guess what?  It’s my fellow viewers and I who are going to change the channel and get the show cancelled.

And it’s up to the creators AND fellow viewers to differentiate between “Surfus suks because she aint hot” and “I was disappointed by Surface’s constant building up drama, only to have no payoff, and the characterization…”  (I won’t go on)

And while I allow that there are a buttload of morons in the world, your average reader/viewer can tell the difference.

Something is very, very wrong with me.  I thought MJD was hilarious.  Was Karen Scott upset?

It’s been what…over 24 hours, and I still can’t tell if they had a blast or if they’re really pissed.

I know they both have a truly wicked way with words, though.

(I’ll shut up now)

In response to your query, Lilith, once the A.R.S.E is firmly established the committee may consider relaxing the entry requirements for those published authors who can provide sufficient evidence of their independent study to the required level.

A rigorous and thorough viva voce examination administered by no less than three fully-qualified experts would, however, be mandatory. Furthermore, all such irregular candidates would be initially admitted to the A.R.S.E for a trial period of two years only. Their output during this time would be subject to continuous detailed scrutiny by a panel of experts to confirm their fitness for the role.

The A.R.S.E. committee strongly believes that only adherance to the most stringent standards can hold back the shocking deterioration of review quality. This has been most recently demonstrated by the abhorrant tendancy of those with claims of mere extensive “experience” unsupported by even on-line degrees in the “Love Arts” from the University of Tantric Ecstasy and Rampant Unbridled Sensuality to evaluate the erotic content of romantica.

That’d be the first time anyone has ever contested whether or not I was an A.R.S.E.

Dear Auntie Peril,

I now officially have a hilarity hernia, you evil, evil woman. I suppose I might as well get my online U.T.E.R.U.S. degree and apply for my A.R.S.E. membership. In the two-year period, would prospective A.R.S.E. members be known as “Little A.R.S.E.s”?

The hillarity continues ...

MJD bans a reader from buying her books ... ever.

I was an ass about it, yeah, but I’m an ass in general, and own to that cheerfully

You do give delightful traffic, though.  I might scheme a way to really piss you off in April, when both of my books are scheduled to release in print. *g*

During the 2 year trial period, candidates could be considered similar to doctors in training and therefore should be referred to as Resident A.R.S.E.s r-a.r.s.e.

Or perhaps Faux A.R.S.E.?

Faux A.R.S.E.!! Where’s my application?! I have loads of experience plus my online degree in T.W.A.T.S. should qualify me as able to “to evaluate the erotic content of romantica.”

MJD the one note wonder here.  Someone on this string made a great point: how many blog pages and comments boxes have been used up by writers explaining they don’t pay attention to reviews? Gobs. Which in itself says something, whether we want it to or not. Assuming everyone reading the same posts can agree about what they’re saying, which is far from guaranteed.

Heck, in various strings, people have read posts and decided: I’m hilarious.  No, I’m a rabid foaming bitch who should be gagged, sedated, then shot, probably without a silencer. No, it’s all tongue in cheek. No, it’s mean.

Or: poor innocent Karen Scott, minding her own business when MJD went off like a mad dog (who should be gagged, sedated, then shot).  No, Karen was a jerk and MJD took her down a peg.  No, she didn’t.  Yes, she did.  Shut up.  YOU shut up.

Or: MJD offended everyone in the world, forever. No, she explained herself. No, she didn’t explain; she’s spineless. No, we just didn’t get it. Yes, we did: she’s an arse.

(Speaking of, my application to A.R.S.E. is now on file.)

And: MJD is a jackbooted thug who thinks only PhD candidates should review her books. No, she doesn’t even have a college degree; proof she’s the last person who would think that. Well, maybe, but she’s still a spineless shifty-eyed loser dumbass whore. Well, okay, I’ll give you that one.

My point, and I do have one (and let’s hope I make this one better than the first one, and whoops, there went my spine, I just slithered into a boneless pile right in front of my screen), is that it doesn’t matter how many posts there are on a topic, how many explanations, how much debate, how much name-calling…people are going to make up their own minds.  If they didn’t before they even waded in.  If you educate someone, awesome. If you change their mind, great. If you don’t, that’s okay too. Either way: I know a lot more about reviews, reviewers, and Amazon than I did on Monday.  And that’s for sure.

:::Checking:::

Yeah.  I still think this is hillarious.  I’m probably going straight to hell when I die.

So, now we know the two blog topics guaranteed to generate a robust discussion are reviews and MJD.  These two may be more popular than man titties.  Maybe not, but it sure looks like it.

Seems to me there can be good reader reviewers and good author reviewers.  Being a writer or not shouldn’t preclude someone from reviewing.  Now, writing “the dialog sparkles” for every book and giving every freaking one 5 Gold Stars - yeah, that’s not a reviewer.  That’s a PR person.  But, the real issue here is the one raised by Beth.  No matter how this debate comes out we need to make an exception so that Beth can rip on Gabaldon’s books.

And to the extent the former argument on this topic (I believe it came from a mess I started) resulted in Shannon being called a fucktard - I apologize to Shannon for my role in that.  Name calling isn’t good.  Neither were the nasty private emails I got (not from Shannon).  All bad.  Maybe we should stick to talking about MJD.  Less chance of PTSD.  I love her books…

MY PLOY TO GET MARYJANICE DAVIDSON TO CALL HERSELF A DUMBASS WHORE ON SMART BITCHES HAS WORKED, MWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

And now, the Four Horsemen. *hoofbeats*

Anyway, thank you, MaryJanice, for an excellent executive summary. It also illustrates the subjectivity of the reading experience. If these little bits of writing—with the authors on hand to provide clarification, mind you—can be interpreted in such a dizzying array of ways, then imagine the number of reactions and interpretations possible for a whole friggin’ BOOK.

I can only dream of aspiring to A.R.S.E.; the sad fact is, I’m far too lazy to acquire even THAT particular bit of certification.

Either way: I know a lot more about reviews, reviewers, and Amazon than I did on Monday.  And that’s for sure.

Don’t we all?

Hate mail to the wench who started this whole thing can be directed to:

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

hey, didn’t you start it all, Angie? So you’re an ARSE too?

I would never, ever presume to be a more popular topic than man titties.  That’s. So. Wrong. :-)

I’m crushed that MJD didn’t take me up on my offer to trade my husband for ARCs for life. He’s quite good.

Save me a seat, Ferfe.

And no apologies, HelenKay. That was definitely my shoeprint in the pile. It was a good discussion (you know, except for the fucktard part)and your comments did actually change my opinion of the whole matter. I’m not really traumatized. (And I’ll have to eat chocolate after this, but I miss Ms.Called Me A Fucktard’s blog every day when I bloghop. I enjoy her view on things)(Well, except her view on me *ggg*)

“Here’s the terrifying part that authors hate, just hate to own up to”

Not true at all, at least in my case. It would be awful if writers needed some kind of degree.

Shit, if we’re trading husbands for ARCs, then I’d like to offer the Very Tall Husband to Laura Kinsale, Loretta Chase, Barbara Samuel, Jennifer Crusie or Lisa Kleypas. Yes, he eats a LOT, and he has a bad habit of forgetting stuff like birthdays, but:

a) HOT. Seriously, he’s one of the hottest boys I’ve ever met.

b) Is 6’8”, and thus is handy when you need something retrieved from great heights.

c) Computer-savvy. He’s broken and ressurected more computers than Elizabeth Taylor has husbands.

d) Enormously strong. When I got my elliptical machine last year, he single-handedly wrestled that beast into the living room, when two of the guys at work (burly ones, too) could barely lift it into the trunk of my car.

e) Smells nice.

f) Smart. He has a large vocabulary, and he ain’t afraid to use it, grrrrwoof!

g) Loves animals, though he likes cats a lot more than dogs.

h) Will introduce you to more weird new music than you can shake a stick at, from French electronica to Senor Coconut.

First one to bid, wins. I have the tranq gun at the ready.

Anders: Good point. My statement was just a wee bit too sweeping.

Hey, I went out and got my hair cut and spent like 5 hours in traffic, only to come back and find that y’all are STILL talking about this.

More than that, I must say I’m impressed. If you read this whole debate starting at RTB and then come on over and finish up here, you get this amazing and rarely-witnessed phenomenon: WOMEN in the ROMANCE community actually CRITICIZING each other and saying what they HONESTLY THINK about the other person, but not being Great Big Babies about it and taking their toys home after wailing “get out of my sandbox, you meanie!” Way to suck it up, buttercups!

Incidentally, my opinion is that MJD’s original comment wasn’t at all that non-writers shouldn’t review. Just that semi-literate Amazon reviewers shouldn’t discourage a writer because what the hell do THEY know, anyway? Which I really have to agree with. But frankly, I’ll agree with anything that allows me to piss off the Ladies of Lallybroch. I mean, I do have my priorities. And I really enjoyed every moment of my vilification. If that’s a word.

PS: Candy, you forgot that I’m even in even deeper moral doo-doo than that, because I am (gasp! shock! fetch me the hartshorn!) friends with actual authors.  Lawks a’mercy and quelle scandale.

I haven’t even made it far enough up the ladder to get Amazon reviews - shitty, or otherwise.  Well, okay, The Amazing, Reads a Thousand Books a Month and Thus Usually Gets Protagonists’ Names Wrong Harriet Klausner has reviewed my books, but I’m pretty sure she reviews pamphlets about Famous Jewish Sports Legends and Nora’s grocery list in her free time, so she doesn’t really count.

I can’t wait until I’m all grown up and I can get some illiterate Amazon book bashing going on too.  Ah, the things we aspire to.  I’m also looking forward to my first hot flash.

“Incidentally, my opinion is that MJD’s original comment wasn’t at all that non-writers shouldn’t review. Just that semi-literate Amazon reviewers shouldn’t discourage a writer because what the hell do THEY know, anyway?”

This is entirely too reasonable an interpretation; therefore, I refuse to accept it. Do you hear me, Beth? JE REFUSE.

“Candy, you forgot that I’m even in even deeper moral doo-doo than that, because I am (gasp! shock! fetch me the hartshorn!) friends with actual authors.”

Holy fuck! That’s right!

Hey, put in a good word for the Very Tall Husband with Laura, will ya?

“Shit, if we’re trading husbands for ARCs, then I’d like to offer the Very Tall Husband”

Candy, I have no ARCs, but am wondering if you’ll take a few bottles of wine and a gently used Fendi bag in exchange for the Very Tall Husband?  If he will regularly take out the trash and scrape the snow off my car, I’ll throw in 6 months worth of Jamaican Blue Mountain pure (a helluva deal at $35-$50/pound).

‘If these little bits of writing—with the authors on hand to provide clarification, mind you—can be interpreted in such a dizzying array of ways, then imagine the number of reactions and interpretations possible for a whole friggin’ BOOK.’

EXACTLY. I got a review that totally trashed one of our books…Too much backstory, plot too complicated, worldbuilding terms not properly explained, too long. The reviewer ended with my favorite empty statement, “needed more editing’.

Not a week later, I got a review from another site—the polar opposite. Reviewer raved about how great the backstory was, the plot was complicated but well thought out, loved the way the worldbuilding terms were explained without it being overdone, etc.

Two reviewers, two totally different opinions. Who was right? Who the hell knows? Almost as much fun as the reader who yelled at me because one of our books made her ‘think too much’.

Goes back to the old salt: Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one, and some are more offensive than others. Getting upset about them does no good—they’re not going to go away. Take what you can from them and move on.

And MJD…the bit about the convo with your editor cracked me completely up. Self-deprecating humor has always been my favorite, and I’ve actually HAD conversations like that.

Sorry, Shaunee—I’m allergic to alcohol AND hypersensitive to caffeine. And I am fond of the big old lug, so if I whore him out, I gotta make sure it’s totally worth it—to me, anyway.

Heck, in various strings, people have read posts and decided: I’m hilarious.  No, I’m a rabid foaming bitch who should be gagged, sedated, then shot, probably without a silencer. No, it’s all tongue in cheek. No, it’s mean.

See, I think you like having it both ways—or either way, or no way, or anyway in between.  There’s a little bit of that Mark Twain wisdom that the best practical joke is the one recently played on you, I guess.  And having spent an entire semester with a Con Law professor who had clerked for two Supreme Court justices telling us how unqualified he was for the task of teaching us has made me extra sensitive to disingenuous self-flagellation.  Not that I know what’s going on with you or not, but FWIW, I think there’s a sharp, sharp edge to your commentary that some of us have reacted to (and that at some point eclipses the humor).  It won’t stop me from buying your books (the hardcover prices have slowed me down there all by themselves), but it surprised me. 

As for being a writer.  Good reviews, fan mail and everything else is a DRUG.  If you get three emails today that say they like your book, you need four tomorrow that say your book was the best they’d ever read and they sleep with it under their pillow.  You CAN’T depend on this drug.

I don’t think this point can be understated, and I think it’s the single most powerful reason there is so much resistance to critique in Romance.  Authors write for fans, a word that implies both extremity and approbation, and as long as readers reside in the “fan” category, they are the target audience.  But have those same “fans” critique a book, and all of a sudden we’re not qualified to judge.  I don’t blame authors entirely for this conundrum, because I think it’s promoted by the industry as a whole, but it’s an attitude that goes as far as clinch covers and man titty IMO to de-legitimating Romance in the eyes of readers outside the genre.  And while it’s something that may have its roots in sexism, women are now policing it all by ourselves.

yah about the MJD Voice (or any romance writer)—you can read it if you like it, and you can ignore it if you hate it.

The beauty of this all is that we’re not actually talking about a judge or even just a law professor trying to impress you by being unimpressive. There will be no test at the end of this section and her declarations won’t go down in the law books.

If I were picking someone who reminded me of MJD I’d say it’s more Ali . . dancing around like a butterfly occasionally stinging like a bee.

I love reader reviews—readers are who I write for. But I do take exception to some things.

1. Snarky reviews that consist of wording like one I got on Amazon: “This book was terrible, I never finished the first chapter.”

If a book is badly written, that’s one thing. If it’s just not to your taste, that’s different. One of my biggest pet peeves is readers who trash a book NOT because it’s a bad book but because (a) they never read that kind of book but read this one anyway and HATED IT and/or (b) went into the book with a preconceived notion what it was about, was disappointed that’s not what it was and proceeded to trash it for not being what no one ever said it was.

That said, I also object to review venues, be they online or off, that don’t provide professional quality reviews. If you’re going to have reader reviews, then at least have the honesty to say that’s what they are. There is a difference, and having been a reviewer before I was a published writer I think it’s unfair to readers not to make clear which is being offered.

When I read MJD’s comments in threads on other blogs, they sounded like a slightly wittier version of the reviewer hateration we’ve heard from the likes of PBW, but with a substantial amount of tooting her own horn thrown in. What finally tore it for me was the catty comment about Karen Scott misunderstanding MJD due to a language barrier. Huh?!

A few people appear be giving MJD the benefit of the doubt and assuming it was all in fun. They’re entitled to their opinions, of course. Every follow-up comment from her has been, in my view, a desperate attempt to make herself look clever and still take swipes at her critics.

From one way of looking at it, the Authors Behaving Badly phenomenon is a good thing. Instead of buying a book from an author who acts like — what was that word? ah, yes — an “asshat” on the Internet, I can spend that money elsewhere, preferably on an author who doesn’t constantly remind us of how many books she’s sold. PBW’s comments in this regard are particularly insufferable.

No matter how this debate comes out we need to make an exception so that Beth can rip on Gabaldon’s books.

Beth has my full championship, blessing, permission, agreement, patronage, approval, and support to do so.

I’m late to the party again, but lemme say this: I know some pretty dense PhDs. Persistence is more important than talent or brains when it comes to getting one.

And: the internet would be a damn boring place if only PhDs got to voice an opinion.

Finally: as an author, I hope for a fair-minded review. Negative reviews only upset me if they are factually incorrect or attack me personally. A review that says *didn’t work for me and here’s why…*—that’s actually a useful thing, if not a particularly painless one. 

The only Amazon review I have ever complained about was one that gave away a major plot twist, and I only asked for it to be editing to fix that. And Amazon did do that much.

we’re not actually talking about a judge or even just a law professor trying to impress you by being unimpressive.

No, because who really cares about that isolated of an audience?  The coverage here is so much bigger.  Stakes are much much lower, but the coverage is exponentially broader. 

But even on that small clasroom scale, what I found interesting was that this law professor came across to many in the class as NEITHER impressive or modestly unimpressive.  Personally, I was grateful he prepared me so well for the coverage of the confirmation hearings, but if student evals are like Amazon reviews, I think the guy is in for a surprise.  Of course, neither those nor his comments over the course of the semester go public, either.

Persistence is more important than talent or brains when it comes to getting one.

Oh, this is so TRUE!  I used to have a lot of disrespect for my own degree because of this, until I started law school.  Now, at least three times a week, I am profoundly grateful to that program for training me to be intellectually flexible and assimilate loads of disparate information more easily than I might otherwise.  Had I done it the other way around, I think law school would have ruined me for grad school, but the one invaluable thing grad school really taught me was that thinking and writing are essentially the same activity, and I labor every day to make them so in my own work.

Ya’ll start using big words and my brain shuts down.  Just say’n. ;-)

I tend to think MJD doth protest too much.  For someone who claims to not care what others think, she sure is expending alot of energy jumping from blog to blog to defend her lack of care.

“Something is very, very wrong with me.  I thought MJD was hilarious.  Was Karen Scott upset?”

Clarification, Karen Scott never gets upset about debates on reviewers and reviewing. She gets upset over children dying at the hands of pedophiles.

MJD in her off-the-cuff way was trying to explain what she meant and didn’t mean by her comments, unfortunately for her, her I-want-everyone-to-know-how-perky-and-funlovin-I-am doesn’t always translate well in the written form.  She has the kind of sense of humour that not everybody is going to get, especially if they haven’t read her books. Incidentally I got it.

I didn’t think she was particularly hilarious, (but that’s just because she used too many caps in her posts) but I appreciated her forthrightness.

So you see, she didn’t upset me at all, my calling her ‘nutty as a fruitcake’ was strictly a term of endearment. Seriously.

Somewhat on the subject (but a little off, I’ll admit)—here is a guy who’s collected “one star” reviews from anonymous Amazon reviews of classic books.

Romance writers who are getting slammed can rest assured, they’re in very good company:

http://tinyurl.com/7mjqn

Sherryfair, you made my whole weekend with that link.  I’m howling.

MJD in her off-the-cuff way was trying to explain what she meant and didn’t mean by her comments, unfortunately for her, her I-want-everyone-to-know-how-perky-and-funlovin-I-am doesn’t always translate well in the written form.  She has the kind of sense of humour that not everybody is going to get, especially if they haven’t read her books. Incidentally I got it.

The fact that you didn’t get upset about it made a huge difference for me. 

It’s interesting thinking about this and the thread on this site a while back about what is funny to some people and not to others.  Until the last few books of MJD’s I was a big fan, and even though snarky, the humor never has never seemed mean to me.  I think all of us probably draw the line between funny and mean at different points (and some people think mean IS funny).  Had I been on the receiving end of MJD’s comments, I would not have taken them as breezily.  Because I’m one of those people who doesn’t get what’s funny about a practical joke, either, even at the height of my college suite wars (we moved the guys’ furniture out into the quad; they filled our suite knee deep with dead leaves, inclusive of dead rodents).  I’ve always been intimidated by the aggression inherent in the practical joke, what I can’t help but see as a mean instinct somehow sublimated in humor.  I’m not saying that was I thought was going on, but the whole exchange was an interesting litmus test of where people fall on the mean/unfunn - benign/unfunny - mean/funny - benign/funny scale.

That Lonestar Review site reminds me of a review of the Time Traveler’s Wife I saw on the Quality Paperback Book site, in which the reviewer lambasted the book as “kiddie porn” and criticized its “fowl language.”  If only she had understood the brilliance of the pun, though.  Anyway, that review generated so many rebuttals, I’m guessing it sold more copies of the book than not.

OMG. If I ever forget why I love this site, remind me to hit this post again.

Bitch, please. :)

As an author, I can say that readers are the only people qualified to review because readers are all that matters. Yeah, yeah, it sounds like pandering. Bite me, it’s true. Even the quote-unquote qualified reviewers are readers first, far as I’m concerned. Granted, I get a little more jazzed when there’s a good review from EW than in anything else, but that’s mostly just because it’s E-frickin’-W.

Another thing - before a book is finished, I’m all up for constructive criticism. I need it, I crave it, I must have it. After a book is published, and I can’t go back and change it, then reviews go into two camps - My Reader (people who like the book) and Not My Reader (people who don’t.) I love My Readers, and I wish Not My Readers the very best in finding a book that suits their tastes. It won’t be as good as mine, but that’s their cross to bear. (Go ahead, say it. I know you’re thinking it. Bitch, please. Tee hee. I don’t know why that’s cracking me up so much, but it is. I freakin’ love Candy.)

Now, I have been very blessed in that the majority of my reviewers have been My Readers (knock on wood, may the trend continue), and I heart the shit out of them. NMRs don’t really bother me, unless they’re of the “This writer sux,” variety, in which case they annoy me, but I try to get over it quickly. Life’s too short. As long as you’ve got a backup for your opinion which you’ve taken accurately from the text, I have nothing but respect for the review, no matter who wrote it.

That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it. Unless one of the SBs gives me a bad review, in which case, I will weep. No pressure, girls. ;)

Why are you trying to kill me? I have bronchitis and its burns like hell when I laugh.

“you don’t even need to be particularly literate to write a novel that’s consquently slobbered over by readers like a 10-year-old boy at a NAMBLA meeting.”

Fricking classic!

Ah! The Lone Star Review page is by Matthew Baldwin of Defective Yeti.

Of course it was funny!

God, I love this site.  Intelligent women who can actually have their own opinions (which might very well - gasp! - not all agree) without the passive-aggressive, insipid apologies that mark too many romance writer/reader discussions.

*side note: On a professional writer’s loop I’m on - one of many - there was a writer who stated her viewpoint on an issue.  Several other writers chimed in with conflicting opinions (nothing inflammatory, mind you - they didn’t even say fuck or asshat).  The first author immediate posted saying that she’d never state her opinion again.  What the fuck?  Then a bunch of the other authors rushed in to appease her.  Bitch please!  Grow a fucking backbone.  See why I love this site?

Anyway…

I agree with Lani.  Reader reviews are what it’s all about.  The good ones make me think I’m doing my job and keeping My People happy.  The bad ones are hard to read, but I do pay attention.  Perhaps I did, indeed, fuck up.  Of course I tend to ignore the poorly written bad ones that can’t even manage to get names and major plot events correct, and I assume that My People (or Potential My People) reading the crappy ones are smart enough to see the bullshit therein. 

Of course if I got a crappy review from the Smart Bitches I’d rend my clothing, weep, wail, and gouge my eyeballs out.

How about the fact that technical papers are aimed at technical audiences, while novels are aimed at—hmm, let’s see—READERS.

Am I the only person who noticed that Mrs. Giggle officially passed the torch to Candy & Sarah today?

http://kg184613.bravejournal.com/entry/20280/

Congratulations, Ladies.

Speaking of reviews, am I the only person who hadn’t noticed these Gabaldon entries on Amazon?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A3RLR7I90KXZI5/ref=cm_pdp_reviews_see_all/104-3473040-9588743

Either she wrote those reviews or someone has gone to a great deal of trouble to fabricate a cover story to impersonate her. Whoever it is knows about her Ph.D., her involvement with the RFB&D organization, and the fact that she lives in Arizona. If you Google angustroll and scroll down to the German Amazon location, the Amazon software gives up the reviewer’s real location, which is Arizona instead of Minnesota. She lives in Arizona.

“I’d read the phone book, if Ms. Gabaldon wrote it.” — angustroll

Even better Scroll down to the bottom and look at the sig line on the Biology of Plants review by angustroll

DG writing her own reviews also satisfies MJD’s PhD requirement for romance reviews. So, you can believe what she says about the books.  Just say’n

But… DG’s Phd is in the non-artsy-fartsy, geeky-labcoat-wearing, formaldehyde-snorting, frog-bothering subject that is Biology.

Unless documented evidence indicating an alternative classification would be more appropriate is brought to the attention of the committee, a PhD is typically classed as a level 5 expert.

However, the rules clearly state that in the interests of fairness she may only legitimately criticise parts of a novel that fall within her own area of qualified expertise. This would be: Biodiversity in Upland Bracken of Inverarie or, bubi5.

Another classic, this time in the review for Outlander:

“The series (I couldn’t separate it into books; it’s all one huge, marvelous story) is the best thing I’ve read since I found WAR AND PEACE in my teens.”

::boggle::

That’s kind of sad, actually.

I agree, Mademoiselle le Bat. She’s famous, highly successful, beloved by her fans. Why do this?

I guess it just goes to show that sock-puppeting is not for amateurs. I recommend getting a degree from Sock Puppet University of Northern Kentucky.

Off Topic:

I’m unashamed to say that I gave Outlander five stars (not as a romance, but as fiction), but I’m interested to know what others hated about it.

I was traumatized by Jamie’s, um, attack, and I didn’t particularly care for Claire, but that was okay, because it gave me comfort knowing that I’d make a better lover for a strapping, young, bonny Scotsman. Oh, yeah.

But I think it’s one of those love it or hate it kind of books. So those of you who hated it. . . what really chapped your hide, if you don’t mind my asking?

Yeah, I’ve gotta say that I’m not exactly an obsessed fan, and I knoew that she has a PhD and lives in Arizona. *shrug*

I don’t think she needs to post her own Amazon reviews. I think she’s doing okay, people.

I KNEW you guys weren’t reading what I said earlier.  That link takes you to a reviewer named angustroll.

On your way panning down the reviews of Diana Gabaldon’s books look for

Biology of Plants by Peter H. Raven
Edition: Hardcover
Price: $92.30

Now look at the sig line in that review by angustroll.

This is not guessing guys.

I ADORE Diana Gabaldon.  Someone that talented and brilliant should not have to do that.  What hope is there for average joe writer-girls if the gods of the language are resorting to faking reviews?  Everyone has been saying that Amazon reviews are worthless but look at the lengths she’s gone to there.  Why?

Goddamnit, I am a LAZY smart bitch, and now you made me go and do work and shit.

I agree that the review is signed “Diana Gabaldon, PhD”, but anyone could have typed that in. Also, I found that review all over the internet, so it may not have originated on Amazon. Someone may have copied it from the original source and pasted it there.

More than that, my gut feeling just says NO! Someone would have to be crazy—and I mean, has-she-been-taking-her-meds crazy—to post something like “The woman has class,” in a fake review about her own book. That’s supremely tacky and takes balls the size of time-traveling stones AND an inflated sense of being able to control your public.

Sure, I would’ve considered doing it at some point if I get published, but not after that Canadian Amazon debacle where you could see the reviewers’ real names for a couple of hours. *shudder*

Oh, and what kind of drunk-at-8-in-the-morning idiot would then accidentally SIGN HER OWN NAME to a psuedonym created solely for pumping up her own ego?

I have written very few (reviews \ recommendations) for books on Amazon. Look for Lisa Valdez’ Passion for ccruciger if you want to see what I’ve liked enough to post on—and no I’ve never met Lisa Valdez.  Judi I know and love but I have favorites on her list and not so favorites.) I have a LOT of writer friends and there are several books I need to go post a blurb on for at least two of them.  But.  BUT.  If I don’t have an opinion on a book one way or another, I’m not posting a review.  If I hated a book, I would not post a review. 

A.  I do not have time to do it justice.

B.  There are better qualified reviewers out there—and not PhD’s but people who read a lot and know how to express their opinion in an informative way.

and

C.  I’m suck ass at being diplomatic. 

Until Revenge Gifts I’d never even noticed that Amazon HAD a review section.  I take RT’s reviews, recommendations from friends, and online reviews (No offense but my reading tastes do not synch with the SB’s so I am more likely to buy from their C\D list than the A’s and B’s. )  and I click my way through the list to the shopping cart and get the fucking hell out of there before I go broke.

Now? It makes me nuts.  Because I have no idea what to think.  Are they important?  Do they matter?  Should I have solicited reviews from readers who email me?  Or.  Is it just a comment wasteland that everyone ignores like I used to?

What*The*Fuck???  Someone who knows something needs to find out the facts and report back immediately because I think everyone is completely full of BS.

I just ranted, didn’t I?  Damn.  Where did THAT come from?  I must have unresolved review issues.

Damn Diana for shattering my blind spot.  I was so happy there in that corner.

Pardon the typo’s —I have deep, unresolved review issues—aparently.

Victoria - why would the location appear as Minnesota or wherever and translate to Arizona under the German Amazon reveal thing?

>>Victoria - why would the location appear as Minnesota or wherever and translate to Arizona under the German Amazon reveal thing? <<

I gotta tell you, I’m as inexperienced as you at the Amazon review thing. I’ve only posted three myself. (Two fives and a one. Like you, if a book is a 3, I don’t feel passionate enough to write a review. The 1. . . I felt compelled. I didn’t want some young girl reading the book and learning that Love = Emotional Abuse. It was disgusting. Anyway. . .)

When you create your reviewer name, don’t you put the location in yourself? I just don’t understand where the German site would pull from. Surely not your shipping address? I have no answer for you. *blank stare*

And FerfeLaBat, I love, love, love your name, btw. What does it MEAN? Every time I see it I am intrigued.

Maybe it’s just me, but the new slant to this thread is making me squicky.  If it’s true, then it’s sad.  And humiliating.  I’m embarrassed FOR her, and vaguely reminded of the time a jerk-off in middle school pantsed The Fat Girl and everyone laughed at her.

If it’s not true, then accusing her of it is pretty heinous.

Nobody asked my opinion, but there it is.  Can’t we just leave this one alone?

Victoria,

College Nick Name.  I’ve used it for more than half my life and most everyone knows who I am regardless.  Mr. Mike wrote an article for Rolling Stone spoofing charities. FerfeLaBat was the poster girl for sexually deprived prostitutes.  My room mates thought it was hillarious because I’d never had sex.  TMI?  You asked.  It stuck even after I ... I’ll stop there.  ;-)

Stef,

I agree.  But why would a fan do that to Diana if it’s ...  I can’t wrap my head around it in any direction.

I honest hope it’s NOT her. If it’s someone who has been impersonating her since 1999, that’s pretty freaky, and I hope she knows about it. And has a restraining order against them.

If I recall correctly, Amazon didn’t always have a way for you to look up everything a reviewer has ever written. As they’ve built up the “community” aspects of Amazon, they’ve added all these little personalized areas, including recommendation pages, wish lists, and so forth. Back in 1999, a reviewer could post under the same user ID for multiple reviews and safely assume that it would be difficult to connect the dots between all of them.

Amazon reviews are regularly plagiarized by other sites. I’ve seen reviews that I wrote ONLY on Amazon show up on 10 other sites that I’ve never even visited. My guess is that the same thing happened with the original review that contained DG’s sig line. That’s why you’re seeing it all over the place. It’s unlikely that the original poster did anything more than post on Amazon.

The Amazon user ID is tied to your shipping, billing, and email information. Back when they had truly anonymous reviews, you could put any old thing you wanted for your location. They’ve tightened up that process considerably, and as I understand it, if you ever posted under a user ID, the software displays the city and state from your shipping address. I haven’t done any exhaustive testing on every possible permutation, but from what I’ve seen with my own reviews, that appears to be how it works.

P.S. Under the new pen name/Real Name system, pen names do give the option to manually enter a location. I suspect that the German site is putting up both pieces of info (what the user says is his address as well as the shipping address) for the old user IDs that don’t quite fit the new profile. When these reviews were posted, the new ID system didn’t exist.

I just think we should give the poor woman the benefit of the doubt. Hell, it could be some person who retired and moved from Minnesota to Arizona. It could be someone who WANTS to be Gabaldon.

>>Back in 1999, a reviewer could post under the same user ID for multiple reviews and safely assume that it would be difficult to connect the dots between all of them. <

<

I agree with you there, but the last review was written in 2003, so unless she was living under a rock. . .

>

>Maybe it’s just me, but the new slant to this thread is making me squicky.<<

And I agree with Stef also. I don’t know why, but the whole thing is uber creepy. And, as usual, here I am involved with the creepy stuff. Damn it.

I don’t think brushing it under the carpet works on the DG issue. Sock puppetry is rampant in epublishing (yes, I realize she’s with Delacorte or similar and not with an epub). There’s also the issue of purchased reviews (referencing epublishing and not DG) and I wouldn’t be surprised to find out, given some of the reviews I’ve read versus the book supposedly under review, that some authors are reviewing their own books on book review sites (as opposed to on Amazon or B&N). And then there is the viral marketing on the reader lists. Giving someone a pass, particularly someone of this stature, is giving the whole practice a pass.

given some of the reviews I’ve read versus the book supposedly under review, that some authors are reviewing their own books on book review sites

This is an interesting point because I’ve heard of this happening. An author or editor using a pseudonym to work for a review site and then reviewing a book they wrote or worked on.

Personally, I don’t know where they find the time.

AngieW: “Personally, I don’t know where they find the time.”

AngieW,

Well, one guess, they’re taking from the time they could spend writing better books.  :-(

Someone’s probably thinking “just write the best book you can” blah blah blah. But I find that hard to swallow, like a teacher telling the *fat* kid to sit on the side of the playground where the other kids won’t kick and punch him. Or being told to just make sure your child is as well prepped for the SAT as he/she can be and don’t worry if there is rampant cheating on the tests.

So, (question to the group) are viral marketing, fake reviews, etc., acceptable business practices? Companies engage in the practice in other industries ... double blind weight loss studies, physician endorsements, etc., etc., etc. If it’s standard business practice, should authors everywhere take the kid gloves off and start acting like *true* professionals?

I feel like I hould clarify that I absolutely LOVE the first 2 books of the Outlander series. But I also DESPISED the last two and blogged it in no uncertain (and vulgar) terms, in case y’all missed that. What’s funny to me is that I never considered what I wrote a “review” - it’s just me blabbing about books like I always have and always will. I have no doubt that some people who read it actually decided to buy the book. I also have no doubt that I did a lot of Gabaldon fans a service in warning them away from the last few in the series.

The great thing about the internet is that reviews often become a dialogue, and I personally think it’s great when reviews get reviewed. Pick it apart and say it’s an empty argument, if it is. Show us all the ill-considered and plain ignorant things the reviewer is saying. No one ever accused me of being too vague about what I disliked, or of not having actually read the book - they just hated that I cursed and that I didn’t continue to worship at the altar of The Great Gabaldon.

And on the topic of angustroll=DG: I hang out with writers - published and unpublished, very successful and very untalented, the whole gamut. Pretty much every single one has ego issues, and I don’t think even humongous numbers of books sold (or scads of adoring fans) magically cures insecurity or the desire to have rave reviews. Someone mentioned the Canadian Amazon Disaster, which pretty well shows that authors high, low, and in-between will write their own glowing reviews.

I also have no doubt that I did a lot of Gabaldon fans a service in warning them away from the last few in the series.

I’m one of those people. I didn’t read the last two, although Fiery Cross has been on my bookshelf since it’s release. But I read your blog post and what you said made complete sense to me. So I happily decided to pass on them and remember the series in a positive way.

Weird thing with this is that Amazon.co.uk won’t let you see all of a reviewer’s reviews or search for a particular reviewer. I’m very in touch with my inner Luddite at the moment, so please let me know how if I’m wrong. Still, I didn’t even realise you could do such a thing.

Anyhow, it does have my antennae twitching, but quite frankly, this is the internet. For all anyone can tell, my posts could be the randomised output of an infinite number of monkeys merrily bashing away on keyboards in some wrinkle of the space-time continuum. If they are, and this is in no way intended to be a comment on the validity of this theory, they’re probably rather beautiful, highly-evolved marmosets who smell faintly and attractively of nastursiums.

What I mean to say is that this debate has been centred on the fact that a review’s origins are the only source of its validity. But I prefer to come to things from the other end of this spectrum. An author has just as much of a right to publish comments on their own books as any other

human with an internet connection. I really don’t have a problem with this, and their point of view can often be just as informative.

Even if they feel the need to spend untold hours constructing false identities and hiring teams of crack reviewing operatives

  to flood the internet with positive feedback, so be it. In fact, that sort of determination is rather impressive.

No one can control this sort of thing, but we can evaluate a review on its own terms as well as look at the source. And we can debate the lot. Which is more entertaining and probably does more for “buzz” than any stellar review.

I love you, pretty, pretty wee marmosets redolent of nasturtiums EvilAuntiePeril. If I were a man, I’d want to have your attractive, silky-furred offspring

manbabies.

Candy, many, many thanks for the kind offer, but truly there’s no need for you to hide your true self behind an equivocation like “if I were a man”. We all know you for the hard-bitten, flinty-eyed, testosterone-driven, 32-year old ex-Navy SEAL, secret agent sheikh you truly are. It’s okay that you like romance, really. Promise the guys won’t laugh as they shave off all your body hair and stake you out naked in nothing but a lacy negligee on the gun turret of USS Titan Uranus.

We also know that SB Sarah (aka Cardinal Liqer Richelieu) is currently residing in the Vatican as the pope’s closest adviser, and he likes romance too. Especially the “naughty” bits. (S)he’s working on a mission to get him to peel the fake “Lives of the Saints” covers from his prized collection of first edition Sandra Browns and post the best bits from the latest EC e-book on the Holy See’s intranet.

Come into the light, it’s beautiful here. Oook.

Evil Auntie Peril: Weird thing with this is that Amazon.co.uk won’t let you see all of a reviewer’s reviews or search for a particular reviewer. I’m very in touch with my inner Luddite at the moment, so please let me know how if I’m wrong. Still, I didn’t even realise you could do such a thing.

Try this. Go to amazon.co.uk and search with the string loretta chase scoundrels. Scroll down to the first review, which is by a Top 500 Reviewer. Click on the icon with the 5 stars. You’ll be sent to that reviewer’s spot on the reviewer rankings page. Click the link under ambersaxon696’s name, and you’ll see all her reviews.

I haven’t yet seen a feature on Amazon where you can search for a reviewer by name, but depending on how deep the Google index of a particular country’s Amazon site is, you may be able to dig out a reviewer by Googling and restrictiing the sites it searches amazon.co.uk (or .ca, .de, .com).

That should have read “searches, such as amazon.co.uk”.

One of the most destructive things about overblown sock-puppeted reviews is what they do to the authors who write them. A person who already has a problem dealing with negative feedback is only going to make herself more insecure. And she may find herself resorting to this practice more and more, including other situations where she might receive other-than-glowing feedback. It’s poison.

That’s one of the reasons why I’ve said repeatedly that I hope angustroll isn’t Diana Gabaldon.

celeste: “That’s one of the reasons why I’ve said repeatedly that I hope angustroll isn’t Diana Gabaldon.”

Oh, celeste, me sock puppet you long time, honey.

ahem ... WELL you could go ask the angustroll that hangs out on DG’s book boards ... I particularly like this posting at:

http://www.voy.com/14018/1/12696.html

where good ole angus “not a sock puppet” troll states: “I’ve lurked for a long time on Compuserve, and I’ve never seen DG make *any* grammatical or spelling errors. I don’t think I’ve ever found any in the books, either—and I’m a professional editor (technical stuff). There are typos, sure, but these aren’t “mistakes,” as such, just typesetting or keyboarding errors.”

HEY, why doesn’t someone invite her over to answer? I could use one of my sock puppets to do it.

Of course, it’s quite possible that maybe, way back in 2000, angustroll was being helpful and posting a review on Amazon of a book that DG really wanted a review posted for ... and that’s why the name was deliberately signed as Diana Gabaldon PhD.

That actually sounds plausible

But, of course, it’s self serving to have both DG and angustroll disclaim ... and sock puppeting your own book boards ... guess we’ll have to go on faith.

Oh, celeste, me sock puppet you long time, honey.

Hmm? Wasn’t quite sure what you meant by that.

celeste,

just me trying to be funny in the dirty dirty world of sock puppets.

Ah, okay. ;-)

One of the main things I love about sites like SBTB and Mrs. Giggles is that I get someone’s honest opinion about a book. No bullshit, no hidden agenda. Not to mention profanity and other kool words, which I find immensely entertaining.

By sending flocks of fangirls to fill up Amazon with 5-star rave reviews and shilling for themselves under fake identities, authors make it even more likely that readers are gonna tune out those reviews and come over here.

Hey, that’s it! Candy and Sarah are doing the frothing fangirl reviews! Mwahahaha! A plan so crazy it just might work.

just me trying to be funny in the dirty dirty world of sock puppets.

I adore erotic romance authors who know how to give good sock puppet.  Silk stockings at eleven?  Or perhaps—in winter—chenille.

Where do you get those cool-ass quotation marks? Me wantee.

Aha! Thank you Celeste. So it’s only the “top ###” reviewers that have such links. It seems .co.uk users get the clunky version whereas .com has all the bells and whistles, though. Not only do they include a link to “See all my reviews” after every reviewer but if you go to “your store” you can also search “by people” for a particular reviewer’s name. But it looks like there’s some limits to who you can search for, since older reviewers’ names don’t appear.

Use the HTML Markup <BlockQuote> Quited Text <

/BlockQuote > with

Drat!  Quoted!  Quoted!!  Too early in the morning.

Let me start this comment by saying I’ve known Diana Gabaldon for 14 years and work with her at CompuServe’s Books and Writers Forum. 

I spoke with her today and she denied being “angustroll”, said she does not review her own books for Amazon, and did not post the reviews under the name “angustroll”.

I believe her.

Darlene.  I appreciate the update and reassurance that this has all been a crack-induced hallucination. I’d recommend she get that Amazon glich fixed, ASAP.

Does Ms. Gabaldon know who Angustroll is?  I would love to know what Angustroll thinks of this and if she knows how it happened.  Obviously she has been an ardent and steadfast fan for many years.  She would have to be sick over this.

Ferfe—

Yes, Ms. Gabaldon is aware of those Amazon reviews and who did actually post them, but I’m not at liberty to add anything else.

I was just feeling annoyed ‘cause I knew she wasn’t salting Amazon with fake reviews of her books, but rather than just jump up and defend Diana, I wanted to get the straight story from the source.

Comes from my past as a reporter, editor and news director.  One of the first things I taught my children was the unofficial motto of the Chicago City News Bureau:  “If your mother says she loves you, check it out!”[g]

I love that movie, Sarah!  The first time I saw it I was watching it alone at home and screaming, “Look at the fax!  Look at the fax!”

Sure, I would’ve considered doing it at some point if I get published, but not after that Canadian Amazon debacle where you could see the reviewers’ real names for a couple of hours. *shudder* ~Victoria

But if you knew you wouldn’t get caught ... could you?  I had a hell of a time just writing a review for those few books that I liked.  Can you honestly review your own work?  I say it can’t be done. You would have to have some kind of multiple personality disorder to do it justice. Though I must say Bonnie Vanack’s rendition over on my blog was a classic.  (Now I’m wondering if she didn’t ask Blair Valentine to write it under her name… which takes me back to the MPD theory).

HA! Twenty-nine my dainty, tufty and territory-marking

bottom. I bet you claim that’s all your own hair too. I’ve seen your birth certificate, Sergeant “Candy” Cain Lustwolf. “Thirty-two” tactfully ignored any years after the last decade.

No, no, FerfeLaBat, I was just kidding, I swear. I would live in utter FEAR if I actually had the balls—or sick urge—to do that. When I heard about the James Frey controversy, I almost pissed myself. WHO could DO that? I mean, I couldn’t tell that kind of lie to an utter stranger for fear that I’d be regarded as a pitiful, insane piece of trash if anybody ever found out. But this guy just puts it out there for the whole world to check into. Ew, it just gives me the creeps.

I would feel like the most pitiful loser in the world, I think. If you can’t get good reviews based on the writing, then you need to think good and hard about that.

Oh, and as for the “Harriet Klausner” ruse: very cunning double-bluff, guys, but you can’t fool the discerning public. No single person can read that many books. It’s both of you. And your husbands, parents, siblings, goldfish wrangler and the slightly effeminate poet called Ambrose whom SB Sarah lured to her house under the pretext of finding a rhyme for “fluted brick chimney” and then locked in the attic, keeping him alive on a diet of violet creams and peach schnapps.

On the other hand, someone’s butler must be the “Edwards” half of Cassie E… He’ll be the first to crack under pressure. Guaranteed.

EvilAuntiePeril-

Will you marry me?  Yes, yes, I know I’m a woman, and already married, and too old for you, but these are small obstacles, surely.

Your wit, your charm, your freaking unbelievable way with words - You Must Be Mine!

Say yes!

Interestingly… all of angustroll’s reviews have been removed. So I wasn’t able to see what the fuss was about.