Reviews
Writing as Liza Conrad, I got two really nice reviews--one from PW, one from Kirkus--notoriously picky. I was happy because it was like getting an "A" from a notoriously tough teacher.
Yesterday, I got a seven-piece, incredibly detailed publicity pre-package from my Magickeepers publisher. I was blown away since, I can tell you, there are never enough publicists to go around at publishing houses and you can get nothing in terms of hearing from your publicist (or more likely an obligatory introduction), or you can get a lot. You can hear from them often or not much. It's a mixed bag. I was assigned one publicist--they hired this woman exclusively for one of my books, and she was without a doubt the most disorganized mess of a publicist, and then disappeared with personal problems, I presume after cashing her check from the publisher. So I'm already just thrilled by this plan they have for my book.
One interesting part of it was about how authors can garner reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. Just an advice piece. And I was struck by the following (paraphrased): Do not shy away from honest reviewers who know how to criticize in a balanced way. Avoid reviewers where you can see they eviscerate in a bad review.
I don't know that I pay attention to reviews. That's for my books or anyone's. I don't Google myself, haven't in years. I just find my focus is better spent BEING than READING about myself. When I read a review in a magazine, like in People, while waiting for the dentist or something, I might take note . . . if it sounds like something I might like, I will check it out even if the review is lukewarm. If a review of something I might like is really whithering, I might STILL check it out to see if the bad review is so deserved. In general, I guess, I have reached a point in like where, no matter how much I may not like something, I cannot imagine writing a really, really nasty review. And when I READ one that is so one-sided that it sounds, on Amazon, like the person writing the review is having an aneurysm over the book . . . I have to wonder, "What is this reviewer's problem?" Not "What is wrong with this book"--but what is wrong with this reviewer who takes it almost as a personal affront.
I wonder if I am alone in that. Maybe it's how I was raised. I have never hid that I don't read romance. I don't read Nora Roberts. I don't read James Patterson or some very popular writers. I march to my own eclectic beat in what I choose to read. But I am always pretty clear that . . . "It's not my thing." I would never read something and say, "This writer is an affront to humanity and all of publishing." I just don't get that.
Thoughts?
30 comments:
First, congrats on the reviews.
Second, I was thinking about this recently because I had told a little tale on my blog about Stephen King's "Bag of Bones" and its publishing history. After I wrote it I dorked around the web reading a couple reviews of the book. Now, I've listened to an unabridged audio version read by King himself (it's awesome) several times and read the book 3 or 4 times--it's just one of those books I come back to every couple years. It's not perfect, but it strikes me.
Anyway, while reading these reviews, not only did I not agree with them, I couldn't quite figure out what the reviewers were reading the books for. By that I mean, they were apparently reading "Bag of Bones" and looking for things that I don't even consider worth thinking about when I read a novel. One of them claimed the female protagonist was poorly drawn (which I don't agree with and am puzzled by in this context anyway, wondering what more they could want) to the one that really puzzled me, how they felt that the ghostly manifestations were mechanical. It's possible that means "unbelievable" or "ineffective" but what I was thinking as I read these reviews was how these reviews seemed to divorced from the book itself and the people that might actually buy and read the book.
And I'm a guy who used to be a book reviewer, but I'm increasingly thinking that the typical book review is a total waste of time if it just doesn't give you a brief synopsis of the book and say, "I liked it, here's why" or "I didn't like it, here's why." Everything else is nonsense.
Hi Mark:
That is very interesting. To me, it's sort of like someone who goes to a July 4th opening Will Smith "movie" expecting a "film" with nuance as opposed to popcorn action. To me, you have to judge things against what they are. If you hate ghost stories or vampire stories or romantic comedies . . . why are you reading those books? What are the people who BUY those kinds of books expecting?
I also wonder, a lot of the time (most of the time), about reviewers by writers versus reviewers by readers. I think writers tend to be harsher. Maybe it's jealousy, maybe it's how high they set the bar, I don't know.
I remember when The Roofer came out, hearing from a reader who, on my behalf, defended the book at some review site from a really harsh review. I thanked her for the link and so on, and didn't visit at first, but my curiosity got the better of me. When I read the review, I was really puzzled. I didn't think this person read the same book I wrote. One of her complaints was she didn't believe this was how the Irish mafia operated, where was the glamour? Since I took bit and pieces of that book from actual people I KNOW, and actual peiople my dad knows . . . and actual neighborhoods I have been in . . . I realized that my experiences were real and this reviewer's expectations were a television/movie expectation and when they didn't align--she faulted the BOOK not her expectations. It was rather eye-opening, actually.
E
You know, I don't read reviews, much. I will read David Montgomery's (I have no idea why I read his and no one else's), and I will note what books Mark mention, but otherwise, I just like word-of-mouth mentions on blogs, but not full-blown reviews. I like to learn something I can apply to my own writing from a review, and that's not exactly the purpose of a review, LOL.
Congrats on the publicist! You must be thrilled and relieved. I'm kinda on a high this morning, too, because I just negotiated for my royalty rate to double at one little pub! Maybe I shoulda been an agent. It's fun!
SPY!!!!
That is so cool!!!!!!! And I am sure Pseudonym is worth every penny . . . er . . . percentage point!
xo
E
I used to do reviews on my blog for MotherTalk, and I think a lot of writers fall into doing reviews because we do a lot of reading and it's an extra way to get paid for writing...
But I think you're right, some writers are much harsher critics than they need to be. I get not liking a book, but going the extra mile to say it's poorly written, the author's an idiot, blah, blah, blah... I read it as sour grapes. At that point it doesn't matter how legitimate their original comment was, everything after becomes moot to me because I don't trust the reviewers perspective.
For me, reviewing was a bit hard. Most of the books I got, I really did like. And they wanted honest reviews, they were really clear on that - but there were two, both by well known authors, that I really didn't like at all - wouldn't have even finished if I wasn't reviewing it (I don't think it's fair to write any kind of opinion on a book you don't finish reading).
I didn't bash the books though, I was really clear that some of the things I didn't like were my own taste - because I believe that. One in particular did really well in other reviews, I just didn't get into the writing, it didn't pull me in enough and I wasn't invested in the story. So in my review I gave the synopisis, listed the things in there, as in, if you like this you might like this book, and talked a bit about the places where I disconnected but I didn't place the onus on the writer... that's basically why I stopped reviewing - looking at it, I wondered who the hell that even helps to have a reviewer that won't say either, you'll like it or hate it.
Merry:
I think your approach to reviewing is very mature . . . and fair-minded.
I think, too, with the advent of "snark"--some reviewers seem more intent on showing how clever they are at put-downs than really providing a proper review.
E
Erica, I'm the same way. I read reviews if I happen upon them, but they don't have any effect on my decision to buy the book, movie, whatever. My husband, on the other hand, religiously follows movie reviews and has to be forcibly dragged to one that received less than two stars.
Congrats on the reviews AND congrats to Spy!
Congrats on the publicist. I used to read reviews. Thought it might make me a better writer. Then I started reading the books that were reviewed well. Then I noticed that 90% of the reviews seemed to have nothing to do with the book as I read it. Looked at negative reviews and found the same to be true. Now I just read what I want to, listen for peoples taste I admire to mention something and go read that too. I read all the books I can by the writers I know.
I'm sure that when I get published I'll have to deal with the critics and reviewers... but until them I can strictly ignore them.
melanie:
In terms of movie reviews, I have found one or two reviewers whose opinions seem to align with mine most of the time. So if they rave about something, I'll make the effort. And if they hate something . . . chances are I'll understand why. But one reason I like them is their reviews have good plot summaries of the movie, and really are very balanced.
E
ewoh:
That's very interesting . . . you're right. I can just as easily say I've read a rave for something, gone and read it or seen it, and said, "Hmm . . . I don't know what the fuss was all about." Sometimes it's very hard to live up to hype.
E
A friend of mine had her first book published - a fictionalized auto-biography in verse. It was excellent and selling fairly well, up for awards, etc. That is until one person gave it a scathing review. And I could tell from that review that something in the book hit a nerve. That review wasn't about the book, but rather about this one person's reaction to her own life because of triggers she hit in the book.
Unfortunately that one person was highly placed in literary circles and the book sales plummeted.
I do read some of the reviews on Amazon, but mostly that's the non-fiction books I'm looking at for work related projects, not fiction.
When I buy fiction, I like to be in the bookstore looking over the spines on the shelves and pulling out books to see the cover and read the blurbs. No reviews there.
Great reviews, by the way!
And good luck with the publicity to come. Sounds awesome!
If you come out L.A. way for a book signing, let me know. The wife and I would be happy to take you out for some excellent vegan food.
Erica, you make a good point. I guess I should say I read them but don't let them influence my decision. I do like hearing the plot descriptions.
Erica, you are a rock star! Way to go with your publicist. It's so fun living vicariously through you.
This is a poignant blog, for lately I've questioned books I've read outside my usual reads (and have uttered nasty comments of to myself, such as "This got published?"). Now I know why I viewed them as I did. They weren't my cuppa-tea, no matter the rave reviews, the fact they were on the NYT Best Seller list, etc. So, thanks for clearing that up for me.
As far as reading reviews, I only read the ones on products I'm about to buy from QVC. Other than that, book/movie reviews sound like a lot of ass kissing to me. I'd rather read the book/see the movie and judge for myself.
sarah:
I'd love to grab vegan if I head to L.A. One of my dear pals lives in Silver Lake, by the way.
E
Sarah:
Oh . . . and that experience with your friend--how awful. And yes, sometimes you can just "hear" a personal note to it. Something that doesn't stick quite right.
E
kath:
I have heard many people say, "Well if THIS can get published, surely there's hope for me" or something along those lines. And I think yes, if something rather ordinary gets published, there is hope for everyone. By the same token, sure, some of what we don't like just would NEVER be our taste.
Red Dress Ink, which published a half-dozen trade paperbacks of mine is actually owned by Harlequin, as is MIRA, which published three of mine. And I went to dinner once with an editor and asked, "How does all that 'I married a shiekh and had his baby' crap get published? It's so antithecal to feminisam" and so on. But she said, "Look, some of that sells HUGE and there are devoted readers who love to escape with it." I realized then, years ago, it's a taste thing, a "what I choose to escape with" thing, and since then have never tried to figure it out. LOL!
E
Your dear pal happen to be female and vegetarian? I have a monthly dining group...
I learned not to read reviews when I published a piece in the Chicago Tribune last year and got nasty feedback - saying that this person didn't BELIEVE me. It is a newspaper. I was writing nonfiction essays/articles. I felt awful and never read another review or comment.
I don't read reviews of books or movies. Not on principle, I just don't. I'd rather read about it than what someone thought of it, but I do like to hear opinions of people I know, which is why I sometimes will write a blog post about a book I liked. I like reading about books bloggers like, but prefer just when they blog about it, not give an "official" paid review.
Way to go E and Spy. Good karma...it totally rubs off, I believe that, so I'm very close to the monitor!(major static by the way, but so worth it) ;)
Erica, in my short lived writing career I've learned so much, but it has taken me forever to see why I don't fare well in contests: I've been entering the wrong ones, those not suited for what I write, but now I get why.
Thanks to blogs like yours, I'm learning better to understand and thus, not be so hard on myself. (Why does it all have to be so hard? whine-whine-whine...)
Congratulations of the reviews and that's wonderful about the publicist.
So far my reviews have all been good but I know the time will come when I find out how I will cope with negativity towards my work.
I don't read other people's reviews at all. Because opinions vary so much, reviews are meaningless.
Congratulations on the reviews!!!
I don't really pay attention to book reviews. I like what I like. For movies I do a weird thing. I go on Rotten Tomatoes, and read the viewer rating. I almost always agree with it! I seem to be "Everyman" when it comes to movies. Ain't that a kick in the pants!
Hmmm.
I'm going to have to get my greasy little paws on your book. It sounds delicious.
Congrats on the reviews!
Yes, reviews piss me off to no end. I once read this really mean review in regards to Augusten Burroughs' "A Wolf at the Table". It entailed how much she mocked Augusten for having to have suffered abuse from his father, like his was unacknowledgeable just because her own was deemed far more traumatic in her own eyes. I was like "Sheeze. Pain is pain. Everybody hurts and should have the right to their pain, no matter how tragic!!"
sarah:
Gay guy and not vegetarian. :-) LOL!
E
amy:
How awful . . . . and again, I just wonder about the energy of that person--why feel so compelled to challenge it?
E
suzanne:
I have been lucky with mostly good . . . but now I dopn't like to look at either. Just rather stay in my own writing world.
E
robin:
I tend to like snooty films---foreign flicks and so on, and I'm not sure why . . . I just love 'em. But when I want escapism . . . I am everyman (just not romantic comedies--I lean toward action).
E
realm:
See . . . I just don't understand how that reviewer's personal background even belongs in a review.
E
LMAO I agree. I'm not really sure why some people feel so utterly betrayed when they read a book that simply wasn't written for them.
Most books are not "empirically bad." Even if I think a book sucks, it generally has a fan following, so to those people it doesn't suck. Sometimes the writing isn't great, but something in there connects with certain readers on an emotional level and they can forgive the execution of the writing.
And I agree with you on the "being you" instead of "reading about you" thing. There is a lot of ego involved in this writing gig, and sometimes it's best not to know what people are saying about you. Whether it's good or bad. Good can give you a big head. Bad can ruin your day. And at the end of the day, why give faceless and often nameless strangers, that power?
zoe:
I don't feel like reading a nice review gives me a big head because I am my own harshest critic anyway. But . . . it's more that sense, for me, of not wanting to feed into this other aspect of the writing separate from the creating itself.
E
Post a Comment