UK Amazon Kindle Forum discussion
General Chat - anything Goes
>
Have I been too harsh?
I don't think you were too harsh, but I haven't read the book. You clearly stated the things that you were unhappy with (grammar, length, price) as a review should do in order to alert other would-be readers so they can make an educated choice as to if they want to purchase the work or not. You didn't bring in the author as a person, so you are not "trashing the author" (cant think of a better way to word that!)
I don't think your review was overly harsh at all, though I can understand the author having heart palpitations about a 1-star review.In all honesty, his blog post is aimed at no-one but himself. Unfortunately for an author, no-one really cares about their 'rebuttals' to a review.
I would never, ever respond to a reviewer in that way. In fact, on Amazon someone left me a 1-star review and I replied saying that their review actually made me laugh...! (Because it actually did make me laugh)
*spat out water when I saw his picture*Does that make me horrible?
Louise-Lesley (Elle) wrote: "*spat out water when I saw his picture*Does that make me horrible?"
His picture is a classic example of why Movember isn't all that it's cracked up to be.
readers owe authors absolutely nothing at all. If a reader extends their engagement with a book to writing a review, or tweeting it or whatever, that is already a huge bonus. The fact that the review was critical is neither here nor there. You engaged with his book enough to: 1) buy it
2) read it all the way through
3) give your honest response to it, which can help the author refine either their writing, or at least their marketing how to pitch it, or who to pitch it at
I've not read the book so I can't really say whether the review is correct or not. I would tell the author to take a chill pill however. I have a firm 'Keep quiet or say something nice' policy when it comes to replying to bad reviews.I have read MUCH harsher reviews.
There are a few things the author should perhaps keep in mind:
1. American and English grammar are different.
2. Write what you know, not what you've googled!!! (Okay, Okay! Not a cast iron rule; but an American writing about Wales??? VERY iffy if he hasn't lived there/visited often!!!)
3. The more cash the reader parts with, the more they expect and the more irritated they will be if they don't like the book.
4. To me, responding to a bad review gives it more credence. Why are you being so defensive?
5. Not everyone HAS to like your book!!!
That being said, bad reviews are CRUSHING for an author!!! But if you want your book out there being read by the public, you have to take the good AND the bad.
To be honest, I find nothing wrong with the review or the author's blog response. You gave your honest opinion and he wrote what he felt as a wounded author. Neither of you should have any lingering feelings regarding your interpretation of his work. All there is left to do now is for you to move on to the next book, and he, to the next review.
I disagree, TL.As a reader, I don't feel any author has the right to be 'wounded' publicly by a review.
Personally, of course. But to publicly rebuke a review of a work that you've published and therefore put out into the world?
Not on.
If you don't want to be critiqued, don't publish.
More than one author has had a less than stellar review and have sent me an email or pm telling me about how it made them feel. Their feelings are completely valid. I've also had many messages from readers who felt strongly about what they've read, both in positive and negative ways.
My advice to readers is is to share your thoughts. Your negative feelings may guide the next reader toward the book or help to guide the author to improve. Authors, you should look at every review as a positive. You have connected with another person with your words. They were so moved by your thoughts and feelings that they felt moved to share them.
Fercryingoutloud .
Isn't just that worth celebrating? Why does it always have to be a frigging a five star?
Valid points. However, I am not one to tell a reader how to feel about a book or an author whether or not to respond to a review. Your thoughts are logical, but in reality, people tend to bypass the route of logic due to acting on emotions. Hence, the wounded author went into a lengthy rebuttal causing the reader to 2nd guess himself. All emotional. Geoff, continue to give your honest opinions. Sure you may get a response from a disgruntled author once in a blue moon. But honestly, has the author changed your opinion of his work? No. But at least you know that you caused his wheels to turn.
Not having read the particular 'book' I can't comment (though 45 pages is a booklet in my view). I think an author has the right to respond if a review contains something factually incorrect. Opinions are different though, even if they hurt.
Authors have to turn themselves into Sherman tanks and grow armour plating because you will get bad reviews and they will sometimes hurt, but if it's a good, critical review, the writer of said review, as in Geoff's case, may have made some valid points that you can learn from. If you put your work out there for people to read, you have to expect that not everyone is going to like it, and you also have to be prepared to take on board criticism. A good bad review can actually be far more helpful than a plain good review. Just my two cents worth.
I don't think the review was overly harsh, and it nothing else comes from it, I read the blog reply, which did enough to put me off the writer
It is frustrating for an author not to be able to respond to something that is factually incorrect in a review. Really frustrating. Apart from that, no and author should not respond if only because they never come off looking good. I've vented on my author thread a couple of times about things reviewers have said that I believe to be factually incorrect (or a stupid opinion), but respond openly to the reviewer.I would ask all reviewers to make sure that you have your facts right, but your opinions are your own and as valid as anyone else's, including the author's.
Again, a reader owes the author nothing. If they make a factual error in a review, suck it up dear writer, suck it up. Authors have absolutely no right to rag on any reader who expresses their opinion. Readers are not ignorant, do not have stupid opinions. They are reacting to your book. All readers bring their own value system and personal beliefs to any read and it may just be that their values spark off your book to produce what you believe is "a stupid opinion". It isn't, maybe it's more that you didn't foresee how your book would impact on a certain type of reader with certain values. For example my current book deals in many themes, one of which is abortion. Hence I'm not going to send it to any bloggers whose preference is Christian Fiction. If I did unwittingly and the reviewer gave a review in which their clear opposition to abortion came to the fore in how they judged my book, I would respect that rather than dismiss it as "a stupid opinion". Authors have to honour readers. Honour them for being interested enough to pick up your book, honour them for taking 2-5 hours out of their life to read your book and honour them especially if they feel moved to make a public response in the form of a review or a retweet or a 'like'. But do not expect or demand any of this.
I blogged on all this: http://sulcicollective.blogspot.co.uk...
Niall wrote: "I don't think the review was overly harsh, and it nothing else comes from it, I read the blog reply, which did enough to put me off the writer"I agree with Niall, the blog post totally put me off, especially where he tried to pick holes in the reviewer's grammar in an attempt to discredit said reviewer's comments regarding the author's grammar.
As an author, you've got to be able to take criticism. Factual errors are one thing, but if someone has a bone to pick with how your story is written, that's not something you can change at that point. Just leave it and move on. Going into it on your blog or whatever is just whining to an audience, and no one likes a whiner. I'm waiting for a shitty review on one of the two stories I have published so far. Can't decide if I'll have a party and show it off to everyone or if I'll just shut up and keep trucking with a private whinge to any of my friends who'll listen, but those certainly seem like the only two professional options.
Mhairi wrote: "Niall wrote: "I don't think the review was overly harsh, and it nothing else comes from it, I read the blog reply, which did enough to put me off the writer"I agree with Niall, the blog post tota..."
Lol!!!
That is a better way to look at it Mhairi!
New rule: you're not a 'proper' author until you've got some bad reviews!!! ;-P
Remember though, He's not an author, he's a human being.
Marc wrote: "Again, a reader owes the author nothing. If they make a factual error in a review, suck it up dear writer, suck it up. Authors have absolutely no right to rag on any reader who expresses their opin..."No author should rag on anyone. Everyone should try and get their facts right, that's just good manners. I have every right to think a reviewer's opinion on something is 'stupid' just as they have the right to think mine is. The difference is that the author can't really say it. The author must consider it carefully though because it is as valid. Mutual respect people.
Darren wrote: "Marc wrote: "Again, a reader owes the author nothing. If they make a factual error in a review, suck it up dear writer, suck it up. Authors have absolutely no right to rag on any reader who express..."I agree with that. Of course an author can think it. But as a professional they need to keep it to themselves rather than go public and invite a wider debate when all sorts of other agendas get brought to the fray.
Unlike some reviewers who shy away from giving bad or poor reviews to books, I do tend to shoot from the hip and will continue to do so.I do try to look for the positives in books and start them with the clear intention of giving that book a five star rating and then dropping that as I proceed. This book is a case in point, I was on the edge of giving it two stars, then I read the last chapter. That drove the score down fast and in all due conscience I could not raise it above one star. As the author states, his is only the second book I have given one star to. Mind you there have been a couple of others that came bloody close.
I've stopped reviewing books because I'm scared of reprisals (yes, I'm a coward!) , but I gave a book a two star once because the story was actually quite good, but everything else was appalling.To be any use to anyone a review must be, above all things, honest.
Authors should not be responding to negative reviews and trying to defend their work. It makes them look extremely petty and immature. Any reader with half a brain should be able to read a negative review and determine for themselves whether it's valid criticism or nonsense – the author should just stay out of it. If the review is a personal attack, then that's different and they should simply report it as such.
It is a difficult balance to strike. I only ever responded to one review. This was where the reviewer liked the book but marked it down to three stars because she considered it pricy and hoped it could come down in price.http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-revie...
I merely posted a note to her review explaining that I wasn't in charge of setting the price but I suspected that the price wouldn't drop.
But the writer is 'damned if they do and damned if they don't.' I think all we can be is polite.
Geoff is like me in that he doesn't only give 'good' reviews but we both, I think, like to feel that we have said something helpful and relevant, both to the reader and to the author. If you only review books you like, you've dipped out of being totally helpful in my opinion.It must be hard not to reply though.
I only give good(ish) reviews as I only read books I will like.Sometimes when I'm in between books, I'll dip into some trying to find the next book I feel like reading. If I don't fancy one at a particular moment and move on to the next, that doesn't mean it's a bad book, just not right for me. I might even decide I will never read that book as it's not my type of book, but I'd never give a bad rating to a book I don't want to read. If I can tell it's truly awful within the first chapter (as in a look inside) I won't get it and therefore I don't feel qualified to give a bad review.
As a KUF reviewer, I was offered a book to review and I declined as it was awful and I didn't want to have to read it. The worst I've given is a 3* as I neither liked or disliked it
I don't understand authors who try replying to bad reviews. It never ever makes them look good. The only thing to do is to work harder at making a better book next time out.
Ignite wrote: "It must be hard not to reply though...."Depends on how realistic the author is. Do we expect to be liked by every single reader? To do so would be crazy. I know my books are not going to be to everyone tastes. Any negative review would help me refine my target audience rather than hold a grudge with the reviewer. I would still be grateful for them for engaging in the book and responding, negative or otherwise.
Sometimes a bad review can even be to an author's favour. There are two types of bad reveiws; the first is the 'bad' bad review, where the reader has taken the time to thoughtfully and skillfully critically analyse your book, and pulled out all the flaws for all to see. Those are bad for you, because it basically shows where you failed.
But then there are 'good' bad reviews, where basically the reader says such dumb things that it's obvious they simply weren't cut out for your book. I wrote a blog post about it here:
http://jamesccamp.wordpress.com/2012/...
These are good for you, especially contrasted against your positive reviews, because potential readers will compare the two, realize the bad review is invalid, and feel more inclined to buy your book to spite the bad reviewer.
It's quite complex psychology :)
James wrote: "the first is the 'bad' bad review, where the reader has taken the time to thoughtfully and skillfully critically analyse your book, and pulled out all the flaws for all to see. Those are bad for you, because it basically shows where you failed."The thing is that an author needs both sorts of reviews, the first so that they can improve their work, the second, I believe, enhances their sales. In the long run I firmly believe that both do. That's providing the author takes the criticism aboard.
James wrote: "Sometimes a bad review can even be to an author's favour. There are two types of bad reveiws; the first is the 'bad' bad review, where the reader has taken the time to thoughtfully and skillfully
It's quite complex psychology :) ..."
I disagree, the pertinent psychology does not relate to that of any prospective reader. It's that of the author.
Every author must ask themselves what it means to them to be a writer. What would it take to validate them as writers? How many sales? What if you didn't make that level of sales? What is your attitude towards readers? Does it change with the scale of your readership? What is your relationship with readers, how do you interact with them? And reviews obviously forms part of this. It's the writers' psychology will help determine how they react to all of these issues
Marc wrote: "Every author must ask themselves what it means to them to be a writer. What would it take to validate them as writers? ..."Well I suppose I realised I was unlikely to live the Scrouge McDuck experience :-)
The problem is that to a greater or lesser extent the book is 'our baby'. The temptation to leap to its defence is powerful.
An honest review that is perceptive, honest and even damning can in the long run be a positive thing. Certain reviewers we all know take a great deal of care in their reviews, are honest, and if they say 'it's a crock of sh*t' then, alas, it probably is. At that point you've got to roll up your sleeves, get to work and fix it.
Been there, it's painful, but if you're lucky enough to get that sort of review, genuinely helpful and can make you a better writer.
But if the review is just some vindictive twonk who is only trying to be nasty, then I think you can either ignore it, or just make a few polite comments correcting matters of error. Ignoring could be the best bet.
Jim wrote: "Marc wrote: "Every author must ask themselves what it means to them to be a writer. What would it take to validate them as writers? ..."Well I suppose I realised I was unlikely to live the Scroug..."
There's the problem right there. To a professional writer, and I do not intend to cast aspersions here as I suspect you and I are both at similar levels within our chosen profession of writing, but books are not babies. Same as muses don't really exist. An author under contract has to turn in a new title every year or whatever their contract states. They do not regard them as babies. They are content to release them into the public's bosom and give them up for adoption into whatever the readers want to do with the books. An author's creativity is geared to being able to produce new work after new work, year after year. That Philip Roth at age 78 and after goodness knows how many titles has opted to retire from writing rather than have the pen prised from his cold fingers at death, is quite unusual.
Marc wrote: "James wrote: "Sometimes a bad review can even be to an author's favour. There are two types of bad reveiws; the first is the 'bad' bad review, where the reader has taken the time to thoughtfully ..."
I don't completely agree with you. For example, if you get only a few bad reviews compared to many good reviews, it's quite possible you're going to simply disregard the bad ones and focus on the praise, thereby not making yourself a better writer as you describe.
If you get only bad reviews, it may hint that you shouldn't be writing.
I think it would only be if you get a mixed bag, like 50/50 good vs. bad, that you'd have to do a whole lot of reflection to see what you're doing 'wrong' and what you need to do 'right.'
But then 'wrong' and 'right' are quite relative, depending on what you're writing. If you're trying to do very formulaic genre fiction, for example, and you were supposed to have a murder after 10 pages and didn't, or something like that, then that's easily rectifiable.
If you're writing something more complex and literary, you're always going to have people who like it and those who don't anyway (just as some people love Hemingway and some hate him, for example).
So ... I think it depends on what you're writing and how you're writing it. But I still think potential readers could be influenced into or out of purchase by the reviews.
Of course readers are going to be influenced in their purchase decisions by reviews. That's why there is so much fuss over them on Amazon at the moment.There is another issue though with a review that details many genuine flaws. It shows the writer did not use either a proper editor, or a series of beta readers before releasing the work, and that's more worrying.
Marc wrote: "There's the problem right there. To a professional writer, and I do not intend to cast aspersions here as I suspect you and I are both at similar levels within our chosen profession of writing, but books are not babies. Same as muses don't really exist..."A good point. A very good point. I have lost count of how many editors I have written for. As a freelance and the bottom of the foodchain, you write in the style they want, at times muttering "I'm doing this for a pathetic £50" but only to yourself because, actually, you need that pathetic £50.
It is a really good training in the trade or craft of writing.
Note I didn't call it an art either :-)
There is also Will's point. At the moment Amazon rules. Someone posts a bad review and they can screw your sales. Setting aside 'Jim the highfaluting artist' and reverting to 'Jim the tradesman', I'm not happy when someone screws my sales because they like playing silly anonymous games on the internet.
But I think I still go back to my two points.
1) If the reviewer is right, then treat them as another commissioning editor, eat humble pie, fix it, learn from it, thank them and move on. Also let your thanks be sincere because you have gained from it.
2) If the reviewer is a twonk, then personally I'd probably try to ignore it, but it might be that there are points of detail you may want to politely correct. Whether it's worth it is another matter.
3)There is a middle ground which might be difficult. I found it with my reviewer who liked the book but not the price. That's fine, I did explain I couldn't change the price, but I'm not going to fall out with her. I don't know her circumstances. Occassionally I might mutter about it being two cappuccinos but I know the time I've not had the price of two cappuccinos.
There again, if I met the lady, I'd happily buy her a copy and probably slip her a pdf of the book as well :-))
I'm going to repost this link to my blog post "Dear Author, Dear Reader" on why readers owe authors nothing at allhttp://sulcicollective.blogspot.co.uk...
I agree with Geoff, it's very important to read the bad reviews your book receives and pick up on the faults of your writing/story telling. Would it be better if you could spot your weaknesses yourself??? Of course it would!!! But if you can't, then you have to suck it up and have them pointed out to you!
message 39:
by
Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo)
(last edited Nov 25, 2012 04:02PM)
(new)
The problem is that writers never see their own flaws. If they could see their own flaws they wouldn't write like that in the first place. This is why you use beta readers and, if you either going through a publishing house or have the money, you employ an editor.The King needs to be told that he is wearing no clothes.
Marc wrote: "I'm going to repost this link to my blog post "Dear Author, Dear Reader" on why readers owe authors nothing at allhttp://sulcicollective.blogspot.co.uk..."
Once they've handed over their money, the book is theirs and they can do what they want with it. It's nice to get reviews and feedback, but once their money lands in my hot sticky mitt their obligations cease :-)
Interestingly I feel that where the book was free, the relationship between writer and reader is different. In many cases the writer is putting their book out free specifically to get reviews and comments.
Whether this should be made explicit to the reader is worth considering.
Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "The King needs to be told that he is wearing no clothes...."I agree with you Geoff, but would ask the question, rather tongue in cheek, 'if the reviewer is king, should they be told that they are wearing no clothes?'
Jim wrote: "Marc wrote: "I'm going to repost this link to my blog post "Dear Author, Dear Reader" on why readers owe authors nothing at allhttp://sulcicollective.blogspot.co.uk...
Interestingly I feel that where the book was free, the relationship between writer and reader is different. In many cases the writer is putting their book out free specifically to get reviews and comments.
Whether this should be made explicit to the reader is worth considering. ..."
Funny, I'm really against free giveaways. But I did it for one of my books for National Flash Fiction Day and the book flew out cos it was free. Had not one review back from any of those. I don't even think they were read in most cases.
Jim wrote: "Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "The King needs to be told that he is wearing no clothes...."I agree with you Geoff, but would ask the question, rather tongue in cheek, 'if the..."
Maybe, but not by the author. Hopefully, if a review was so poorly done as to be farcical, other readers will recognize it and either ignore or call the person out.
As for the situation mentioned by Jim above, that's a tricky one. It's obvious the reader is a moron for docking the book stars due to price, but is it at the level of an 'attack' that would go against Amazon's review policy? I'm not sure.
Marc wrote: "Funny, I'm really against free giveaways. But I did it for one of my books for National Flash Fiction Day and the book flew out cos it was free. Had not one review back from any of those. I don't even think they were read in most cases...."I'm 100% behind you on this one. I am absolutely against give-aways, basically because I don't think that they work. I remember someone saying across on the Amazon forums that they'd given away 10,000 and sold 17. Well I've matched the sales without giving any away :-)
On another Goodreads thread someone was talking about deleting over 300 books of their Kindle. I'd love to know how many of them were free and scanned briefly at best but not read.
I know that if I see a useful historical article available as a free pdf I'll download it immediately because
1) I might need it
2) When I need it, it might not be free.
I don't think other readers are much less venal than me
James wrote: "As for the situation mentioned by Jim above, that's a tricky one. It's obvious the reader is a moron for docking the book stars due to price, but is it at the level of an 'attack' that would go against Amazon's review policy? I'm not sure...."Actually whilst initially a little irritated by the review on thinking about it I'm not especially bothered. On the positive side the reader liked the book. (I don't call them a reviewer, I expect a reviewer to read the whole book) On the negative side they didn't like the price, but to be fair to them they specifically said the price was the only problem.
It does beg another question, what price should books be?
Personally I don't think the cost of a couple of coffees is a bad price
Jim wrote: "James wrote: "As for the situation mentioned by Jim above, that's a tricky one. It's obvious the reader is a moron for docking the book stars due to price, but is it at the level of an 'attack' tha..."I agree. It's very unfortunate the market has been skewed down so much by freebies and $0.99 mass-market type stuff.
I personally decided to go for the high-end of the middle ground - $6.99 USD. Given everything about my book I think this is a fair price, but, if it does turn out to be too high for the market at least I've got some leeway downward.
Once you drop right down there's really nowhere else to go.
James wrote: "I agree. It's very unfortunate the market has been skewed down so much by freebies and $0.99 mass-market type stuff. I personally decided to go for the high-end of the middle ground - $6.99 USD. Given everything about my book I think this is a fair price, but, if it does turn out to be too high for the market at least I've got some leeway downward.
Once you drop right down there's really nowhere else to go...."
The old rule used to be 'pay peanuts, get monkeys'
I get the feeling that some kindle books are being subsidised by the paperback, and others are being sold at an unsustainable price because the author doesn't value their time or their work.
I guess it depends what you're aiming for. I want my books to be read and, hopefully, enjoyed by as many people as is possible. I KNOW that if I price my book under a pound I will have a steadish stream of sales. I also KNOW that if I price it at £2.70 I will not sell at all.It's all very well to say that our time and effort deserves more than that, but the reader doesn't see the months we spend on our books, they only see the price tag. Why would they pay 'high' prices for books that are by authors they've never even heard of? I find it's very easy to only see your side of the situation as the author; the time, money and hard work that you've put into your stories. But as a reader, when you click that buy button, you're taking a chance. You don't know if you're going to be able to finish the story, if the plot is going to fall apart, or you're going to end up hating all the characters! It is a leap of faith, and authors have to see past their own struggles and understand that. All the while there are free and cheap books available anything over £2 starts to look pricey.
Jim wrote: "Marc wrote: "Funny, I'm really against free giveaways. But I did it for one of my books for National Flash Fiction Day and the book flew out cos it was free. Had not one review back from any of tho..."But that's true of 'proper' authors on pucker publishing houses, only there you're paying £8.99 for a title. How many writers are churning them out with little thought or care? No guarantee of quality
D.D. wrote: "It does beg another question, what price should books be?
Personally I don't think the cost of a couple of coffees is a bad price ..."
You'd have thought, but the economics of the post kindle market mean many readers are only interested in the free or $0.99c book and as there are so many of them around, it matters not almost if they pick up a dud. Just move on to the next one on your kindle.
I blogged a while back about my experience of a free giveaway - "Something For Nothing?"
http://self-publishinguser.blogspot.c...
I won't finish reading a book if I dislike it that much (i.e. it's heading for a one- or two-star review), and therefore I will not review it. Often I will abandon a three-star book unless I've committed to review it (of course, I tend to commit to books that I'm likely to like!).So I guess this is a bit of a non-issue for me, as a reader/reviewer.
Speaking as an author (don't use that phrase on the Amazon forums! ;) ), critical reviews from readers are great. These, in great part, are the reason why I brought out the 3rd edition of my debut novel (where the word count dropped from 97k to 73k). But the odd review written by someone who clearly didn't read the book and/or or got their facts wrong (or was just being plain mean-spirited), is very frustrating. It also dragged my average review down to 3.9 thus disqualifying me from being considered on sites that require a 4.0 minimum average rating. I watched about 3-4 5-star reviews (and one four-star) come in before that average went back up to 4.0 ...
The author wrote me up in his blog, defending his book. Understandable really, it is his book after all and if he thought it was a bad book I don't suppose he would release it into the wild and charge for it.
His blog is here:
http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_...
The original review is here:
http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...
What do you think?