Bitchery reader Amy sent me a link to some interesting author reviews on everyone’s favorite free-for-all, Amazon.com. Seems Linda Bardoll has been responding in snark fashion to negative reviews of her book Mr. Darcy Takes a Wife.
Amy herself didn’t enjoy the book, and posted a review as such, which appeared among other more scathing reviews from folks who were downright irate at how much they’d disliked the book.
Bardoll has, in Amy’s words, “decided that she’s not going to take the criticism lying down, and is making an effort to rebut some of the more offensive one-star reviews by leaving replies to them such as:
Due to your outrage, we can only be grateful that you didn’t read farther. We might have to have sent for the paramedics. I do hope you borrowed it from the library and did not pay good money for it. If you did purchase it with so little research, it isn’t surprising that you are unaware that there are dozens and dozens of P&P sequels. I’m certain you can find one among them more to your liking. Really.”
Whoa. The book itself has 379 reviews, which is certainly buzzworthy, but among the 1-star reviews are comments, corrections, and rebuttals from Bardoll, along with, as Amy says, “a few people who’ve tried to remind Ms. Bardoll that it’s extremely bad form for her to reply to negative reviews this way, not to mention making her look very insecure…. To me, it’s as if Bardoll is really destroying her own credibility. It’s one thing to go on a rant on your own site or some obscure blog somewhere, but to repeatedly post snotty comments on a very popular and public site like Amazon?”
We’ve had authors argue with our reviews publicly and in email to Candy or myself, discussing our opinions and wanting clarification of a point or two that we made. No harm no foul. And I wouldn’t think it odd to see an author disagree with a reviewer – in a level manner. People have been pointedly disagreeing with Harriet’s reviews for awhile, authors and other reviewers alike.
But the snide tone and bucketful of sarcasm present in Ms. Bartoll’s responses is rather striking, and confusing. I’m not sure if she’s banking on the news of her behavior spurring discussion and ergo more press for the book, or if she’s not concerned with the effects of her commentary responding to the reviews on Amazon. Either way, given the reaction I’ve seen on SBTB alone from readers who say that the behavior or comments of authors makes them not want to read or buy an author’s books, I’m not sure her reactions are wise. Beyond the question of whether an author’s behavior should affect sales or if the product should stand apart from the relative crazysauce of a specific writer, comments I’ve read indicate that author behavior can affect sales.
Personally, I don’t care what an author does or says so long as the books are quality entertainment, but if an author espouses beliefs that I find truly offensive, I might be more likely to eschew a royalty-generating purchase in favor of a library procurement. But short of kitten-hating, pathos-spewing diatribes about how gays are teh eeeevil, for example, it takes a lot to get me to the library as opposed to clicking a sale online.
What about you – does author behavior affect your intent to buy? And how would you respond to reviews of your work?
I’ve responded to one bad review on Amazon, merely to state that the woman had obviously read an ARC (an error she complained about was removed in line edits) and she should have mentioned that in her review.
Then I deleted it. Because I didn’t want to sound like a crazy person.
How do I respond to a bad review? I impale myself on my pen so that I do not dishonor my name. Or my penname.
Yes,author behavior does impact my buying behavior-I can think of 2 mystery authors whose books I’ve quit buying because they actively support political positions I loathe-and several sf/f authors I won’t buy because of their behavior at conventions.
Oh,yeah,and I owe Nora 4 paperbacks-it’s my own personal rule that whenever she responds with grace and class to an asshat-I go buy another book. 🙂
I buy very few books, because I live in a damn expensive city in a tiny apartment and (presently) with no job. When it’s a hardback original (so, so, so rare, not just because they’re flippin’ expensive but because they take up so much space) I get them from the Strand for half off.
When it comes to something that requires a) money, b) time, and c) space in my wee apartment, I consider a lot of things, like the author’s track record and if I know anything about it, his/her behavior. If La Nora, for example, were, well, unpleasant on this site and over on Adwoff.com, I would be sad, and I’d give some serious thought to not buying her books. It’s lucky that she’s awesome, because I love those damn books. Same goes for Malcolm Gladwell, Keith Olbermann, Jon Stewart, and other people whom I let into my head. I don’t watch Fox News because I don’t like what they say and what they stand for and what their corporate parentage uses their money for. I have pretty much the same feelings about authors, actors, musicians, etc.: I don’t support them if I don’t like them, and I do if I do. Simple, right? Which is why I paid $10.50 to see the Dixie Chicks documentary in the theater.
When it comes to my writing (I’m a journalist, not a novelist, but people do take issue with things like movie reviews), and criticism thereof, I deal with it like any other rational person: obsessive Googling and quiet, profane grumbling at my computer screen. And occasional ranting on my personal blog. And drinkin’. And sometimes, glee. The time someone sent a letter to the magazine where I used to work calling me “smug and ignorant” was one of the best days. At least they’re paying attention.
Hey, thanks for posting this! It spurred me into getting back to work on Lady Chatterley’s Hoover.
Darlene—
Thanks SO much for plugging your books. I’ve only recently forayed into historical romance and I immediately fell in love with it. I will definitely be buying one of your pirate books (I love me some pirates).
(Sorry for the off-topic post.)
Depends on what the author behavior is. I don’t think being obnoxious on Amazon would qualify, if I actually thought the book looked good in spite of the reviews. And I started reading Harlan Ellison because of seeing him speak at Dragon*Con- he kind of makes me think of Lewis Black several decades and another couple of divorces later. But I’ve finally decided I can’t tollerate Orson Scott Card any more. I can enjoy an artist’s work without approving of the artist’s morals, but he hit the point where I don’t want to give him money any more. If I decide any of his books that I don’t already own look good, I’ll get them from the library.
I fought a great battle to achieve a status where I did not have to put up with editors making demands on me, and I will never relinquish that status. For me, novel writing is a virtuoso performance. It is not a collaborative art.
Holy. Fucking. Shit.
This right here? Would be what it takes to turn me off buying an author’s work. I absolutely DESPISE unedited or poorly edited books. I don’t care who you are; editors are absolutely vital to the production of excellent books. Virtuoso or not, there is always, always, ALWAYS room for improvement, and that second (and third, counting the line editor) set of eyes will pick up errors that the author would never find on his/her own.
Yowza, the ego, it’s like Godzilla trampling Tokyo. I’m so forwarding that quote to all of my editors on April Fools’ Day next year, and damn that I didn’t find it in time for this year.
For me, whether or not I buy an author’s book is a confirmation. If you’re going to be a snarky nasty author, that means you’d better maintain a VERY high consistency in your books because *if* I abandon you due to bad writing, if you have an attitude, I will never revisit your books again, no matter what you do.
LKH is the classic example of this. I stopped reading her stuff because I thought it became garbage and committed significant character assassination, even before I knew anything about her personally. But after her actions? She could undo all her crap books, and start focusing on plot and character development again, but the damage has been done. I’m never reading her again, because she lost the ability to keep me addicted and I no longer want to contribute a penny to her bankroll.
To contrast, I went through a period with Stephen King where I just hated absolutely everything he wrote. When I heard his books had gotten good again, since the man does NOT give me an asshat vibe, and instead seems decent and well humored (c’mon, ‘finish the dark tower series or the bear gets it’?) I went right back to enjoying his stuff. No harm, no foul.
With such a huge amount of negetaive reviews I certainly wouldn’t part with cash for this book. I may have looked for in the library and try it for a quick skim, but when the Author has such negative things to say about library readers, and then makes bitchy comments to a “New Mommy” – that’s it, she’s never going to get my attention or money.
I wonder why she even bothered to write a book if she’s going to be so aggressive about it. Better if she had left it in the basement, under glass, where she can love it in a safe, secure environment away from mean people like us who would call it rubbish.
She’s acting very Jerry Springer.
I’ll tell you. There isn’t much in publishing as straightforward and uncomplicated as this.
Just don’t respond. There’s nothing to be gained from it. If
Klausner
someone spoils the book in a review, report it to Amazon, absolutely. But otherwise, it’s just not a good use of your time or energy.
And to whoever was quoted here saying she was a virtuoso and would never relinquish her status of being an author who can reject any and all edits (I wasn’t sure if it was Bardoll or not) – best of luck with that, babe.
Wow. The Anne Rice meltdown was serious crazy. And I’m more than a little amused by how she dressed up the bad fanfiction writer’s rant about “not needing any betas” in fancy clothes and tried to take it out on the town.
I REALLY shouldn’t have bought Blood and Gold…
*blush*
Thank you, Katie W.
Now, back to our usual bitchfest…
Never ever say you did something just because everyone else was doing it.
Am I the only one who cynically believes that some authors may actually amp up attention to negative reviews on the theory that the controversy often sells more books?
Bulletin to all authors: you don’t *have* to go looking for reviews. Your publisher or agent will make sure you see the good ones. Avoid the temptation to self-Google (as lovely-dirty as that sounds). The only good reason to check Amazon is to ensure your book’s information is correct. After that, ignore it.
Live your life, write your books. Stop looking in the internet mirror if you can’t handle what you see.
This has been a Public Service Announcement from the Bureau of Author Mental Health (BAMH!).
It’s not quite that simple for authors, Jeri. It can be as well to Google occasionally to check for piracy—and yes, some pirates are so blatant that they don’t even bother to keep out the search engines. And even if you tell youself don’t follow the links to reviews, the text snippets Google shows are *so* enticing….
Believe me, Jules, I know how hard it is. Been there, done that, last week. It’s an ongoing battle, like any addiction.
A bad review or comment, in my experience, has ten times as much power over a writer’s psyche as a good one. It’s important to know your tolerance for these things and protect yourself accordingly.
Don’t take out your sensitivity on the reader. And more importantly, don’t stifle your sensitivity because someone tells you to be tough and suck it up. Sensitivity is a strength, not a weakness, especially in a creative person. (That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it.)
P.S.: You can always ask a friend to Google you for piracy purposes.
Not that I’ve had to deal with sucky Amazon reviews yet, but I find that being in the Amazon author programme helps on one front. My profile page lets me indulge my rankings addiction without having to see the reviews.:-)
A note for the non-authors here—Amazon rankings addiction is a wide-spread and apparently almost incurable disease, no matter how often we tell ourselves that it *doesn’t* *matter*. So much so that people pass around the urls for various utilities that will aggregate all your rankings onto one page without showing you the reviews or average ratings.
Author behaviour does affect my intent to buy. I’ve not bought nor read an LKH book since she started ranting on her opposition. She’s human, her books are flawed, but as soon as she started telling me otherwise, I stopped reading. It was as though she was writing her books to prove her point(s). I think other authors-behaving-badly have done the same.
I understand that this is completely off topic, but was I the only one discouraged by how many of these reviewers slammed the book by calling it some variation of “trashy romance novel”?
sigh.
Re Anne Rice: Holy block paragraphs, Batman! Is that an Amazon formatting problem, or does she just not know how to use the enter key?
As for me, an author’s conduct definitely affects how I view a book, or whether I even buy it at all. If an author is going to be a four-star jerk to a negative reviewer, that’s only one or two steps away from flaring up over constructive criticism. And when you reject concrit (as Anne Rice seems to have done with her “We don’t need no stinkin’ editors” shinola), that’s it for me. Nobody is a god of writing on their own.
Slightly OT, but the thing about not needing an editor to me just seems self-sabotaging. We all need editors. There’s a limit to how objective an author can be about his or her own work.
Okay, I realize I’m late to the party, but I have a question: was Bardoll NEVER in a writing workshop? Where other writers dissect your work while you sit there SILENTLY? Perhaps she would have benefited from this experience. It might have conditioned her to be less trigger happy toward negative response.
I knew someone would mention Harlan Ellison. Ok, he’s been a manic jerk since the late 50’s—in public. But he was at least a funny manic jerk in his collection of essays on television, The Glass Teat And I don’t pass his stories up, because he writes seriously good stories. “Pretty Maggie Money-Eyes” has to be on the best things ever written about gambling obsession.
However, I don’t have the same tolerance for people with less talent. So if authors want to act out they should first get an objective evaluation of their writing ability.
I would even quit snarking at LKH if she would just rewind to Obsidian Butterfly and before.
Spam blocker: lay91 “Anita, is that you?”
Does author behavior affect if I buy.
YOU BET YOUR BIPPY!
I want my story, I want it good, I want it clever, and I don’t want any damn drama.
That’s all!
I require a pattern of behavior, because I think everyone is a fuckwit occasionally. An error in judgment, a moment of temper not curbed or just a spurt of asshattery. This happens to all of us.
But if there is a pattern of nastiness, or unrelenting arrogance, it will color my appreciation for the work. I’ll have a difficult time getting past it and into the story.
And, yes, there are a spare handful of writers who fall into my WNR category.
But I also believe in redemption. People can change, learn from their mistakes and/or be sincerely sorry for them. There’s that.
Oh God. I’ve just read the book. It isn’t bad *at all*, but it certainly isn’t in the Jane Austen style.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the negative reviews have nothing to do with the quality of the book and everything to do with the fact that there’s sex in it.
Now some of the sex is stupid, such as the idea that you can go out in the middle of JANUARY in DERBYSHIRE and have sex, NAKED, OUTDOORS, without freezing to death. This is a sign that the writer a) lives in Texas or Louisiana or somewhere where winter is two weeks long (and where what is laughably called “winter” would be a very warm spring to anyone else) and b) the writer didn’t research the fact that Derbyshire is in north-central England and has about three months of winter, of which January is the coldest month. But for the most part it’s good.
Looking at the timing of the reviews as well, I notice that she’s getting huge numbers of them within very short time periods, as if the reviews were being directed by some outside influence other than the book’s release.
This all makes me wonder if the plethora of negative reviews is actually some kind of organized campaign by some anti-sex group (like the old Moral Majority) to give bad reviews to the book because it contained sex. In this context, I can see why the author would be furious, but on the other hand I don’t think responding to reviewers with such ferocity helped her.
If she suspected this was some kind of campaign, she might have been advised to respond to at least the shorter negative reviews with a simple, “This review appears to have been part of a campaign by an unknown group to negatively review books solely because they contain sexually explicit content.” If I saw that in a situation like this I’d ignore the reviews.
My husband teaches freshman composition and introduction to poetry. His job is to criticize (constructively, of course). Occasionally, an impressively immature student fires back with a resounding “OMG you are so mean, you just don’t understand my art, I will never write for you again, so there!”
When an author answers his/her criticism in similar form, it makes me think he or she is immature personally and as awriter; makes me think that I would probably take issue with his or her writing; makes me not want to pick up one of his/her books EVER.
As a final thought, IMO, some authors seem to be missing the positive power that bad reviews can have. Personally, I often find bad reviws more helpful than good reviews. And, on more than one occasion, have been prompted to actually purchase a book based on interest generated by a bad review (for example, the Smart Bitches’ review of Claiming the Courtesan—how could I not read it after that review?).
Catherine J: <
I thought the same thing. Hard on the eyes to read too! I loved the ‘public urinal’ comment though. It was worth reading just for that.
Yes, author behavior affects my buying patterns.
I went to RWA last year for the big literacy signing. I met 19 authors, and all but one were friendly toward a happily gushing fan. One author was cold and had a ‘move along’ attitude. I didn’t quit buying that author’s books altogether, but I did switch to buying her only in paperback and only at places like Target so I can get the discount.
As for the Berdoll book, I read it. It’s not the greatest work of literature, and has too many secondary characters to keep track of and develop them all. But I did enjoy parts of it, and liked that she gave Darcy and Elizabeth a passionate as well as loving marriage. YMMV.
I’m intensely shy in person, so I can’t guarantee to never misbehave should I ever get to have a signing—but I’ve *been* that gushing fangirl too often myself. And it would be a slap in the face to all the poeple who were nice about my squeeing at them to turn around and be rude to someone who was squeeing at me.
Security word perform38. Not touching that with a bargepole…
Ugh, what a snob! Unprofessional beyond belief. I’ll be sure to never spend any money on her books!
There’s one online review site that hates me. I mean, ABSOLUTELY HATES ME. They keep reviewing my books and slamming every one. I just don’t get it, but hey, it’s all publicity, right? I could get all bent and tell my publishers not to send them books for review—and yes, they request every one of my new releases, oddly enough—but what’s the point? It’s not like the books are hard to come by. If they really want to slam my latest story, they’ll get the book themselves and slam it.
When I google myself and find another “Deer Gawd that Amelia Elias is the absolute sewer-sludge anal dandruff of utter suckage” review from this site, I fire up the IM, buzz Cat Marsters, link her to it and we pick the hell out of it. We dissect their grammar. We mock their phrasing. We insult their questionable intelligence and doubtful literacy. We write fake scenes in which the main characters of whatever book they’ve slammed stalk and kill the reviewer in particularly brutal ways. And then we attempt to rewrite the review a la Daisy Dexter Dobbs, and fantasize about publically posting this much-trimmed, now-glowing review all over the internet.
Written in the review’s blood, even.
What I don’t do is throw a public fit. That’s just stupid. Besides, after the reviewer’s been repeatedly slaughtered by the foulest forms of torture Cat’s and my minds can think up, I find that I feel much, much better anyway. (What, me, violent? Nevah…)
In the reviewer’s blood, even. Not the review’s. I’m not sure those actually bleed.
In our continuing Moments in Asshattery series (now on PBS):
There’s Michael Crichton, whose “global warming is a hoax” novel got reamed by one reviewer for its bad science. Crichton got revenge on the reviewer by naming a character after him in his next novel—a character with a freakishly small penis, so that if the reviewer made a fuss it would just embarrass him more.
IMO, Crichton ended up looking like more of a fool than the reviewer. But maybe I’m biased, since I agreed with that review.
….“This all makes me wonder if the plethora of negative reviews is actually some kind of organized campaign by some anti-sex group (like the old Moral Majority) to give bad reviews to the book because it contained sex. In this context, I can see why the author would be furious, but on the other hand I don’t think responding to reviewers with such ferocity helped her.
If she suspected this was some kind of campaign, she might have been advised to respond to at least the shorter negative reviews with a simple, “This review appears to have been part of a campaign by an unknown group to negatively review books solely because they contain sexually explicit content.†If I saw that in a situation like this I’d ignore the reviews.”….
Speaking just for me and a few other of my friends who’ve read the book…um…no…this is NOT a conspiracy by right-wing wackos. This seems to be a book that you either like or hate. Everyone’s taste is different, and just because there’s such a disparity between those that like the book and those that dislike the book, it doesn’t mean that those that dislike the book (like me) are part of any big conspiracy.
I disliked the book because I felt the writing sucked, not because a member of the moral majority called me up and told me I should hate it. I felt the characters were portrayed badly. Again, because I, personally, feel that way. I am in no way against a good erotic sex scene…if I was, I probably wouldn’t be here on this site. I LOVE a good sex scene. None of Berdoll’s lived up to my expectation of what a good sex scene should be. Some were really pretty gross and just not sexy at all. (sorry, I felt that having Darcy wave around his bloody, menstruation-covered fingers triumphantly was just not “sexy.” Nor was his request, in another part of the book for Elizabeth not to bathe after an encounter just before they were to host a party so that he might walk around during the party and get his jollies thinking about how his semen would be running down her legs. I mean, ew.)
But because I, and many others on Amazon disliked the way Berdoll writes her sex scenes doesn’t mean there’s a big plot against her. It simply means some people don’t like the way she writes sex scenes.
Perhaps the “clumping” of reviews is simply due to the fact that the book was re-released a few times. The last release was when I picked it up. So, I assume that with every re-release, you’ll get a new crop of people reviewing your book, good or bad. Not because there’s a conspiracy.
If I saw her answering negative reviews with a theory that there was a plot against her, I’d think she was seriously nuts. Which would probably make me want to read her books even less.
Ewwwwwwwwww ew ew ew ewwwww ew EW!
~(sorry, I felt that having Darcy wave around his bloody, menstruation-covered fingers triumphantly was just not “sexy.†Nor was his request, in another part of the book for Elizabeth not to bathe after an encounter just before they were to host a party so that he might walk around during the party and get his jollies thinking about how his semen would be running down her legs. I mean, ew.)~
Seriously?? Seriously?? Darcy? Okay, any guy, but DARCY?
Well, we all imagine in our own way. But my imagination is letting out a big, screaming, eeeewwww-blech.
I must go find a box of Brillo pads and scrub this out of my mind now.
~(sorry, I felt that having Darcy wave around his bloody, menstruation-covered fingers triumphantly was just not “sexy.†Nor was his request, in another part of the book for Elizabeth not to bathe after an encounter just before they were to host a party so that he might walk around during the party and get his jollies thinking about how his semen would be running down her legs. I mean, ew.)~
OK, I read this paragraph way too fast and came away with an image of Darcy waving around his menstruation-covered fingers triumphantly at a party.
followed by…
Chapter Ten: Mr. Darcy’s Straitjacket
I can’t understand the supposed erotic appeal of the post-sex warm wet dribble. This isn’t the first book I’ve either read or heard of it happening in. Even in one of Kenyon’s Dark-Hunter books, the hero tells his woman, don’t clean up, I like the look of my seed on you.
What. The. FUCK. That’s not sexy, that’s gross!
I mean, OH MY GOD. The first time the post-humpty dribble happened to me, I almost puked. Why does no one ever tell their girlfriends that’s gonna happen? Was I just completely naive not to assume it? I can’t be the only girl who didn’t watch porn. Jesus, someone should’ve taken me aside and told me that condoms are your friend for many reasons, and top among them is the prevention of hot spooge running down your ass-crack.
… Hmm. I might’ve just over-shared.