date
newest »

message 1:
by
Emma Sea
(last edited Oct 11, 2012 10:05PM)
(new)
Oct 11, 2012 10:04PM

reply
|
flag

Why guilt? o.o

Also guilt for DNFing Freelancers, but that's minor compared to the first one.
But I am sorry :(

Also guilt for DNFing ..."
Pffffttttt.. first of all the you open your review with words "Not an m/m romance; rather a classic bildungsroman with added hot gay sex." ... I'm not talking about comments like that. I'm talking about comments that use my atypical definition of romance as a criticism and imply that my books are not worth reading because they can't be categorized or because they "fail" at being in one genre or another by not following an agreed upon formula for that genre. Simply pointing out that there's a better word to describe something I've written, or maybe it fits better in one genre than another is not something that irritates me at all.
Frankly, warning readers that something I've written doesn't really fit what they're used to in M/M doesn't bother me either, because that's true and anyone who just wants a nice and easy love story probably shouldn't buy anything I've written. But some people are so smug about it and act like they have to take me down a peg for daring to think I could publish something in this genre. How dare I not ask proper permission to write things that involve men fucking other men up the ass!
As for DNFing The Freelancers ... don't feel guilty, it was really good feedback and it will just make it all the more fun to go all Clockwork Orange on you when I'm done fiddling with the final draft >D

The fact that I'm getting to the point where I'm always distracted while writing by "What Would Emma Think?" suggests the exact opposite *lol*

That sounds like a plan :)
EDIT: am still never using that phrase again in a review though. Because I thought about it a lot tonight, and you're right. It's not useful to dicuss a book by pigenholing it, or rather by explaining why it doesn't fit the pigenhole you expected, or why it isn't what you thought it should be. I don't mean in my reviews of your books, specifically, but rather my reviews in general. So I'm going to work on not doing that.

Isa wrote: "I hate that when you publish something people can fill a review with praise but then caution others against reading because it won't deliver the pre-packaged fantasy they want. It's unbelievably frustrating to be told that good writing is about following the formula."
For the record, when I point out in a review that a book doesn't follow a set formula or conform to certain labels, it's never meant as a slap in the author's face. Like it or not, a lot of readers do want the formula. I like to make sure that anyone following my reviews is informed about what they're getting in a book, just like I want to know when a book contains themes that I prefer to avoid.
Sea's liver says, Someone stop her! wrote: "It's not useful to dicuss a book by pigenholing it, or rather by explaining why it doesn't fit the pigenhole you expected..."
Again, it's useful to readers who want something very specific from their romances. It isn't a criticism to say, "this book isn't X." It's a statement of fact. It's part of a reviewer's job.


In life, there is absolutely nothing I hate more than "X is a girl, therefore X likes shopping and doesn't like maths". But if I'm saying X isn't a romance, because a romance does this and this and doesn't do this, am I not doing the same thing?
The romance genre will grow and change, it should grow and change, so if I am labelling things, isn't that a way of saying "this book shouldn't be like this if it wants to be a romance" and stifling that very change?
I'm still kind of thinking it through.

Noted. I realize there is a danger of reinforcing the narrow definition "romance" by stating that certain books are not romances because they don't do X. I tend to call anything that has any sort of romantic thread (or even a hint at the possibility of future romance) a romance. But if I call something like, say, The Condor a romance, I'm creating expectations in some readers that might not be fulfilled by the book. A reviewer needs to be aware of what a term like "romance" will convey to certain readers and address those expectations, even if the reviewer doesn't agree with them.

I love your hockey series and I sincerely hope you will continue writing. I am sure I am not the only one who wants to know what happens next. In the meanwhile I am off to read Freelancers and I do not care in the slightest how crowd wants to label it.