I’ve done a fair few things since I joined the writing world. I’ve edited (don’t do it anymore – the pay wasn’t brilliant and it detracted from my own writing time), I review and I write. And, of course, I read.
When Syb asked me if I wanted to review for TGTBTU more regularly, I was delighted to do so. I always read the blog for the reviews as well as the other pieces, and I’d done a series on the Romantic Times Conference. Most of the books I review, I buy myself, or I get from NetGalley. I get the occasional ARC. I try to say in the review where it comes from.
I won’t review books by close friends or by publishers or lines who publish my work because friends and publishers mean more to me than reviewers. I try to keep to that particular book and my response to it when I review. If I don’t like a book, I’ll say so, but I might like another by the same author.
Honestly what you see is what you get with me and the reviews I do. I’ve been reading all my life except for the first two years (yes, I was reading at two and reading fluently by the time I went to nursery at three). I grew up in a house full of books. We didn’t have central heating, but we had books, so my mother bought a lot of old and tall bookcases at auctions and filled them with books. Great insulation. Some great reading, too.
So publishers think that some sites don’t review “fairly.” What’s a fair review? It’s only one reviewer’s opinion, after all. And I really want to refute the opinion that the reviewer somehow “owes” something to the person who sent them the book. As a reader, I want to read an honest opinion, which I have the right to agree or disagree with. As a reviewer, I don’t owe anyone anything. I’ve paid my dues, and I want a good read. When I open a book, I’m really hoping that it’s going to be a great read and I’m disappointed if it isn’t. I don’t set out to trash a book.
If a book has tropes that really don’t work for me, then I’ll say so. If a book squicks me out, I’ll say so, too. And it’s not always the writer’s fault, I get that too. If the blurb doesn’t mention it, or it’s sold in the wrong genre, and I pick it up that way, then it’s not a decision the author usually gets to take.
But as an author, I’m getting tired of the “authors should be seen and not heard” opinion. We write our books and we have to then get out of the way unless we’re invited. No, just no. Let me make it clear that author whining is not what I’m talking about here. That is clearly a stupid thing to do. But replying to criticism? Sure, why not,if it’s done in the spirit of discussion? Authors have opinions too and as long as it’s not a whine, I’d like to see more of it. But not author domination. Authors do have the temptation to go on and on. Otherwise we wouldn’t have the stamina to write all those words! And authors tend not to give opinions about books, but I wish there were more authors who dared to do so. But in these austere days, and believe me, they are really austere for the author, there is a lot more careful behaviour.
Author bullying I hate to see, too. When an author declares that her books are the best evah and even gathers a clique around her – not to be confused with fangirls who arrive of their own free will. Which brings up the subject of fan bullying. Recently I had the pleasure of discussing the Twilight books on a private loop without the twihards turning up. It was interesting and we learned a few things about the books that way. As a reviewer, you know if you review a book like that, the fans will turn up, so the pressure is already on to do a good one, or not to do one at all. And the author clan thing, there are a few, and I’m sure some of us know who they are. It means we don’t review your books because we don’t want to deal with the feedback, so you don’t get the exposure. Either that, or a reviewer might choose the book to increase traffic (surely not! But yes).
And now more bullying. The recent assertion by some authors and editors that authors should not give bad reviews – or else. I have never known a responsible editor to do or say that. Never. I’ve seen a few authors say that, and I wonder if it’s a gut response, or if they have evidence. But after all, reviewing is writing, too, and it can be great practice. I won’t be muzzled in that way. If I give up reviewing it’s my choice, and I want it to be a choice. Anyway, if you want to shut me up, offer me a publishing contract. Then my personal reviewing policy comes into play and I won’t review any more books from that publisher or line.
Flippancy apart, and offering me a publishing contract on that basis is about as real as that pig flying in the sky up there, I feel very uncomfortable about a publisher who would quieten authors that way, or a big author who would try to suppress comment by threatening boycotting or something similar. I don’t know if it happens, to be honest, but I really hope that it doesn’t.
Reviewing can evoke furious responses, but while I consider that the opportunity to do it is a privilege, I also think that the only person I owe anything to is the reader. I’m not doing it for the author, although I am one myself. I do it to give as honest an opinion as I can. And don’t forget, it is only my opinion. Feel free to pass on by.
I, for one, really enjoy your reviews. I am a reader and reader only. I appreciate the viewpoint of someone who is not only a reader but a writer. It brings something extra to the discussion even if it is not purposeful. I don’t see you saying “I would have written it this way” or anything of that sort.
Overall, I think it goes back to what you said about the choice to be a reviewer as well as an author. It is good to have that choice with there being no right or wrong answer. Those authors nervous about it can choose not to review and those who feel they have something to contribute can do so. I really hope that you continue to find it fulfilling and worth your time and effort.
My last “2 cents” is that I am guilty of selective commenting. Because I am not a “writer” or someone with strong opinions on most topics, I tend to just enjoy what is written by others…the bloggers and commenters who take the time to post. I do appreciate the time and thought that all you ladies here at the duck pond put into your ponderings, reviews, and such. Maybe my New Year’s resolution should be to contribute more to the book blogging community that so informs and entertains me!
I enjoyed this too Lynne. I’ve always appreciated your comments when I read them because I know you can see stuff from both sides. The only thing I don’t understand and that I’m really curious about: You said, “If a book has tropes that really don’t work for me, then I’ll say so”. This is not from your comment (since I’ve never read one of yours that fits this) but from what I’ve seen with reviews many a time. Why does anyone review a book with a premise they don’t like?
The book doesn’t stand a chance. Much of the review is spend critiquing the premise that turns them off. However I really respect when a reviewer does a fair review that says “I didn’t like it much but if you like this premise, you’ll like the book”.
Mary, sometimes it’s not obvious from the blurb or the sample read that it contains that trope. And the other reason is my eternal optimism. Sometimes it actually works. I don’t really like the secret baby trope, for instance, but occasionally the writer pulls it off, and it’s a real thrill when that happens.
I avoid the tropes I really hate, but there aren’t many of those. Probably my unfavorite is the Big Misunderstanding drawn out to unbelievable lengths, but the occasional Big Mis can be interesting and add spice.
In my writing, I like playing with cliches, turning them on their heads and seeing what happens if, say, the woman looks and behaves better wearing her glasses than she does without them. Other writers do that, too, and I love it when they do that.
With most books, I read and hope, but if I don’t have anything erally to say then I’ll put it aside and go on to the next one.
Sometimes, when I get a galley or ARC, I feel obliged to say something. I’m rethinking that, and I’ve decided that I won’t say anything unless I have something interesting to say, good or otherwise. I’ll read the book for review, but reserve the right not to review it, or to put something brief up. I mean, I’ve read some historicals laterly, but I really don’t have anything interesting to say about them. I’ve also read another one that didn’t quite work, and I’m still thinking about that one, because I do want to review it.
Lynne, I totally get that. The opposite has happened too. The book had a premise that I love but a “misunderstanding” went on too long & for the first time I wanted to throw the book against the wall (& I treasure my books). You described what does work, take a premise & put your own twist on it. The author’s style & voice are stronger than the story & it’s not a “cookie cutter” book. I just remembered to mention reviewers who hate an author but continue to read & trash them. Don’t get that either. Has no impact on me as a reader. Thanks so much for taking the time to answer my question. I really appreciate it.
For me, I couldn’t care less whether an reviewer is an author or not. The people who complain because a published author gave a bad review omg, it’s unprofessional, authors should stick together, remind me of the people saying women shouldn’t slate Sarah Palin because she’s a woman. Same sort of bullshit omg oppressed group thinking.
For me, I pay pretty much zero credence to reviewers who don’t post reviews on a spectrum, all bad being as pointless as all good. If I can’t get an idea of what doesnd doesn’t work for them, then I find their reviews useless for predicting whether their tastes will mesh with mine. Or not as it may be – there are reviewers that if they reject a book for x reasons I know it may well work or me.
What I do understand is authors choosing for political reasons not to post non A* reviews – I don’t mean dross reviewed as gold – just not mentioning the dross. I think that’s fair enough – it’s their career and while I think it shouldn’t make a difference, I’m not going to argue with them if they have a perception that it does. I just wish people would quit acting as though being honest was sinful – I cannot stand the ‘if you can’t say anything nice’ trope – particularly since it gets applied so consistently to women and almost never to men.
“I just remembered to mention reviewers who hate an author but continue to read & trash them.”
See I get this – a, if you’re invested in a story, it can take a while to let go if it jumps the snark, b, the process of shredding is cathartic in those circumstances, c, bad fic is its own reward sometimes for the sheer hilarity, and d, it’s important for me at least as a reader that people talk about works and what doesn’t and problematic tropes. It’s not like there’s some kind of expiry date on comment – you’ve disliked this person’s work for x time now so you no longer get to say so.
And incidentally, fwiw, I hate, loathe and detest what LKH has done with the Anita Blake books, and have been known to engage in ritual sporking, but I don’t hate the author. Based on her public confidences, (not the books) I think she’s a loony, but that does not equal hate.
Hey Lynne. Not sure what prompted this piece, though I do hope it doesn’t mean people have been giving you a hard time. I appreciate your work as an author, and I also appreciate what your ‘inside knowledge’ lets you bring to the table as a reviewer. I usually find your reviews informative and insightful, even if I don’t necessarily always go for the genre (don’t much do categories anymore). I always enjoy what you have to say, and I do hope that you won’t be deterred from continuing. While it may well be ‘nicer’ to say nothing at all if you can’t say something positive, I’m not really sure that this particular homily applies to reviewing, especially when you’re not making it some kind of personal attack. I’m not much of a writer myself, but I’d have thought that it’s helpful to know what flies with readers and what doesn’t, even if we don’t like it too much when our work isn’t as well received as we want it to be.
FD, yes, I completely agree. I spent years in the corporate environment, playing office politics, watching other people play them. But that was work and for me it poisoned the workplace.
When I started writing for publication, I promised myself that this time I’d play it straight. I truly love writing, and I don’t want to spoil my enjoyment of it. What you see is what you get. I was always terrified of doing that before, but this time, that’s the way I want to do it. Not to say that there aren’t lots of players out there. I just don’t want to do it, and I won’t. So I review because I enjoy sharing my views and if there’s an ensuing discussion, great. Hopefully it will help to further oru understanding and appreciation of the genre.
Min, no, nobody’s been giving me a hard time, at least not that I know of. I wrote this piece before the comments on Dear Author, because there were rumbles and people talking about reviewing and how it should be done. I work really hard to make my comments about the books, not the author or the genre, or anything else. I can easily love a from an author who has previously written one that didn’t work for me (two recent Sharon Kendricks did that for me). And I do feel that if I explain why a book didn’t work for me, the reader can think, for example, “Well, I love secret babies” and might buy the book on that basis.
Lynn, I appreciate your post. It’s very balanced. I don’t bully, neither do I like being bullied or bullies either IRL or when it comes to authors/reviewers/publishers.
As an author, I do have feelings. I am a real person. But…a negative review doesn’t always sting when the reviewer states clearly what did not work for her and why. As I’ve commented to Sandy M – those kinds of reviews make me a better writer. Obviously, it’s not your responsibility to help me improve, but I do learn a great deal from in-depth reviews and I appreciate the time it takes a reviewer to write them.
I have never been part of a clique, even growing up I avoided them like the plague. Cliques have now become posses and bullying minions. I detest group-think. It’s why the internet can sometimes be such a nasty place. One person snarks and their posse jumps on the bandwagon. Unfortunately the way I see it, that isn’t going to change anytime soon.