Horror Aficionados discussion
Authors, What Do You Feel When You Read Negative Reviews of Your Books?
Kasia wrote: "I've seen more personal attacks coming from authors, especially the self published ones on Goodreads if anything. Last week I was reading a thread where someone rated a book 3 stars and the author..."::facepalm:: Uggh. Yeah, that's super unprofessional. Self-published or not, don't read reviews if you can't handle anything but glowing ones. Regardless of how fair, ridiculous, or downright weird a review might be, you aren't going to make a reader change their mind by yelling at them. It's a huge waste of time, not to mention yicky.
I've seen both, sadly. Greater access to authors and readers can have that downside of everyone showing off their worst qualities.
Mod
Mod
Sorry but that's absurd.
Mod
We keep trying, but that lunatic is like the Energizer Bunny. ;)
Brandon wrote: "I have better reviews on Amazon than Goodreads. Seems like a tougher crowd here, maybe. Some reviews are just plain rude, though. Not a bad review but mean. I had someone say you would have to ..."If you mean that the reviews should be helpful to author of the book being reviewed, then I'd disagree. Reviews are written by readers for other readers. If a reviewer chooses to make their review a platform to provide the author with feedback, then that's the reviewer's choice. But they are under no obligation to do so.
A review belongs completely to the reviewer. If a review is truly that absurd, you can trust a discerning reader to see it as so. In fact, this whole thread sucks. I was expecting unicorns. And their is misspeled words which is the worse. The editor is a crackhead. I am glad I didn't pay for this thread, or I would want a refund. The author should crawl back into the womb of his mother and try to find his creator and beg that his soul be taken back from whence it came and never be born. Two and a half stars.
Kasia wrote: "Brandon wrote: " If it's not your kind of story, then maybe you shouldn't review it at all. "Sorry but that's absurd."
I agree. This would mean that readers should never read anything outside of their comfort zone.
Jon Recluse wrote: "Who let Mark have crayons?"ha ha! Love it Jon. In fact, that in itself is a wonderful review. "Who let the author have crayons?"
More serious, I like to interject my reading experience while reviewing a book. Kind of "Hunter S Thompson Gonjo Journalism" style. My experience reading a book is personal, and more important than the number of stars.
Mark wrote: "A review belongs completely to the reviewer. If a review is truly that absurd, you can trust a discerning reader to see it as so. In fact, this whole thread sucks. I was expecting unicorns. And ..."
Well said, Mark! LOL
Personally, I was expecting bees. The lack of bees is a real let down. But the unicorns were okay.
Mark wrote: "A review belongs completely to the reviewer. If a review is truly that absurd, you can trust a discerning reader to see it as so. In fact, this whole thread sucks. I was expecting unicorns. And ..."
'Like'
Mod
Yes, I think that people have a hard time defining "comfort zone" as well, sometimes its a genre you love, horror but the book stinks, happens ya know. That comment made me think of a baby, who only likes to eat certain few things, of course the baby has to branch out :P
I've never thought I was too harsh in a review; though, I sometimes think that I give a book or an author too much credit. For me, the difference between a one and two star rating is pretty thin.But honestly, if I rate a book 3 stars, it means I liked it. I can find a lot that rankles me about a book and still rate it 3 stars. Sometimes I think reviews I read on GR are made based on what the author attempted to do rather than what he actually did. But everybody is different. I try to back up what I say with an example or two, in an attempt to get the author to see it from my POV.
I had an author respond to my 3 star review with a "whatever" comment. Such can be the arrogance of college professors.
I read, review and move on--occasionally revisiting a review if I feel I need to.
Mark wrote: "A review belongs completely to the reviewer. If a review is truly that absurd, you can trust a discerning reader to see it as so. In fact, this whole thread sucks. I was expecting unicorns. And ..."
This proves it! I knew it was you that gave me that review!
The unicorn thing gave you away. ;)
Jason wrote: "Mark wrote: "A review belongs completely to the reviewer. If a review is truly that absurd, you can trust a discerning reader to see it as so. In fact, this whole thread sucks. I was expecting u..."
Yes, my amazon name is "White Shadow"
Mod
"
Ha! Perhaps he should have saved that for the title of his book.
Gregor wrote: "Kasia wrote: "Gregor wrote: "Kasia wrote: "I've seen more personal attacks coming from authors, especially the self published ones on Goodreads if anything. Last week I was reading a thread where ..."I don't think authors should respond in any way, even to good reviews, unless in some kind of an extreme situation that eludes me (like someone erroneously reviewed an erotic vampire novel called Stakeout when the author's book, of the same name, actually a gritty crime noir about cops in Baltimore?). Responding can be bad for the author's image, bad for the reading climate in that area of the internet; just a bad move. Even the semi-level-headed response on Ender's Game by Card on Amazon.com (which I cant locate just now) is sort of stand-offish and complainey. It lowers the impression of the book when you see the wizard step out from behind the curtain like that, aiming a super soaker full of cow urine at the audience. Although in Card's case, I think he wrote his 'review' in the internet's Wild West of 1999, when there was virtually no rule book on how to behave with reviews on the author's or the reader's side. Still another example besides Rice if you're wondering whether authors, even the giants, read our little reviews.
To an earlier point, the reader certainly doesn't owe the author anything. But as this reviewing culture evolves, I do wonder if there are certain consumer responsibilities to be considered when posting a review, as these reviews do have some influence. The points behind reviewing is, one, expressing your passion for books; warning off others of a bad book purchase; encouraging others to read a book that will make their life better. Ah, and good point, it's about finding a community of readers whose reviews and ratings you trust. Just things to keep in mind, perhaps.
Kasia wrote: "Brandon wrote: " If it's not your kind of story, then maybe you shouldn't review it at all. "Sorry but that's absurd."
You think? I've read plenty of stories that were just fine but not my kind of tale. Why would my review help someone make a decision about that story, if it's not my kind of story to begin with? Memoirs of a Geisha was a very popular novel that many people loved. Personally, it didn't do anything for me, so why would I write a review for something that I know plenty of other people are going to like, even if I didn't? It wouldn't be helpful in any case to anyone. But that's just me. I guess, if I don't like something, I just won't take the time to write a negative review for it.
Kasia wrote: "I've seen more personal attacks coming from authors, especially the self published ones on Goodreads if anything. Last week I was reading a thread where someone rated a book 3 stars and the author..."Yeah, not to pile on self-pubs (because there are many fun, well-written, sometimes important works coming out from that side of it from many talented, cool authors), but these folks as a group also haven't gone through the vetting process of being sane enough to work with an editor/agent, which is a fairly grueling process of tact, professionalism, and negotiation. I've heard some horror stories where even promising writers get dropped when the agent/editor realizes their author is insane and perhaps dangerous. One story involved an author writing his agent into his werewolf story only to have her killed in this really awful, graphic, sexually tortured way and then asking her in this sinister series of follow-up emails if she was ready to get his book published or not? True story, folks.
Mod
That's insane w/ the werewolf story!! I think I mentioned self published because they spam me like crazy lately and when I don't jump in to read their book they get annoying...Some of them ask me straight out to "buy" their book, Im like geez man...
Mod
I really do. That’s like letting your five year old live off french fries for the rest of her life because it’s all she likes and can handle. People learn the most from surprising, unpleasant things, I never read Memoirs of Geisha, but how would I know that I didn’t like it if I didn’t read it? I enjoy reviews from 1-to-5 stars even when I have the opposite reaction, they make me laugh or think in new ways. I’m pretty sure that savvy readers can read a review and still decide if they want to approach the book in question.
Nothing is set in stone, I don’t believe that there is just one type of “your kind of story” I certainly don’t love the same things I was crazy about when I was 20, things change, people change, we grow up and down, you have to taste it all to know how you feel about it. What I like changes organically and both kinds of reviews help in making new decisions. Negative reviews are needed, of course there are normal negative reviews and there are rants that make no sense.. by only reviewing one type you cheat yourself, perhaps being a writer you feel weird about negative reviews, but there’s an art to them as well, sometimes they are more challenging to write than five star ones.
Look through some of the Amazon reviews for Edward Lee books. It is obvious that some of the reviewers never read horror more or less read splatter. You feel its fair for those guys to give a bad rating to Edward Lee, possibly discouraging other readers that might like Lee?Its like a kid growing up on french fries being handed a handful of meth and saying eat up! There's a chance you'll like it!
Mod
I'm old and set in my ways.
Now get off my lawn!
Ken, I do think it's fair if they've paid the price and spent their time reading it, yes. Respect the reader enough to read those reviews and discern that that type of book was not their thing. To say they haven't earned the right to review it is wrong, IMO.
In fact, as I've said before, those types of reviews have often urged me to pick up a book I otherwise might not have.
Mod
So you will let them tell you what to read? Lol, it's probably obvious that they have no idea what was in store for them, its' nice though that they are checking out Lee, maybe they will find something from him they like, if not then their loss.
Meth? Really? It takes one hit to be addicted for life, no clue what you're tying to connect here.
Ken wrote: "Look through some of the Amazon reviews for Edward Lee books. It is obvious that some of the reviewers never read horror more or less read splatter. You feel its fair for those guys to give a bad r..."I think it's fair. Generally those folks write things in their reviews like: "This was the most sick and violent thing ever. There were f-bombs everywhere and tons of unnecessary sexy things happening! The author must be a sicko." And when I read that, I'm intrigued, as would be most potential Edward Lee fans.
Mod
I'm old and set in my ways.
Now get off my l..."
I would LOVE to watch you read paranormal romance :P
Mod
I would run to buy the book from that alone lol.
Mod
I've noticed this on Amazon a few times.
Reviews that read basically the same as what Gregor just quoted. Word for word. The exact same wording, turning up on multiple books. Many of which don't have f-bombs or unnecessary sex in them. Almost as if the person (or persons) writing the reviews never read the book beyond the cover description. Just carpet bombs a single review all over the place.
Have any of you noticed these and how does it effect your attitude towards the books in question?
I haven't seen any of those, Jon, but it does not surprise me. I scan reviews on Amazon only briefly, if at all. Most of my recs come from GR friends or the DarkFuse forums and I don't need reviews to tell me I would probably like it if it came from a "trusted" source.
That is really strange, Jon. I can't see the authors encouraging that, nor can I think of a reason why a pseudo-reviewer would want to do that.... except the old adage "all publicity is good publicity." (a theory I don't particularly subscribe to in this context)
Mod
I'm with you there, Bill. I have my book grapevine here. Reviews are just background noise. I know what I enjoy, and I know who I trust.
Mod
I can't imagine authors encouraging it, but it makes me wonder why someone would leave reviews like that.
Kasia wrote: "Brandon wrote: "You think? I've read plenty of stories that were just fine but not my kind of tale. Why would my review help someone make a decision about that story, if it's not my kind of story t..."Very well said up above, Kasia. I think I came into this thread, yes--as a writer--thinking how bad reviews haven't helped (at least mean ones), but I think this thread is more about reviews for readers, not reviews for writers. As a writer, and trying to support other writers, I think we rally around each other trying to be helpful, obviously, because as independent authors, it can be brutal as anybody knows. But for readers, yes, negative reviews are crucial, especially when they still manage to be constructive for other readers. I might have taken that a little too much to heart as a writer before popping in. I think Gregor made a good point up there above as well on my previous comments.
Mod
I'm old and set in my way..."
You should have seen how I reacted when I found paranormal romance in the horror section at the library. I used many bad words, in complex sentences. :)
I look at it like this: there are 1 star "reviews" of The Diary of Anne Frank saying it's "too depressing" or "childish" and "boring". Anyone with even half a functioning brain should be able to read a review like that and know not to take it seriously. It's usually pretty clear when someone didn't "get" a book and why, because they often say "I didn't get this" or point to all the things the book is supposed to be as a negative. Put another way, it's fair for someone to not "get" a book and write a review based on that. And for me to ignore that or laugh. It's also fair for me as a writer not to write my stories by committee and check with every possible reader to find out if what I'm writing will fit their personal preferences. It's basically part of what comes with putting your work out: some people won't get it, and spectacularly.
I have never received negative feedback from an author over a bad review. I did though give a so-so review on a book and got some interesting feedback from the author. He said he cringed when he saw that I had added that particular book to my "currently reading" list. It was off-genre compared to what I had been reading of his. I didn't think the book was bad. It just wasn't his strong point. Ended up passing several emails back and forth with the author. It was a nice exchange.
I'm of the opinion, reviews are for readers. If an author 'demands' (for lack of a better word) feedback/detailed review backing their low rating- then that, my friends, is called beta reading. That's when the author SHOULD expect brutally honest feedback sent directly to the author, and not 'splashed' into public forums. Once you publish (regardless of method) your 'baby'- just like any other parent you have to LET IT GO out into the world. Some people will like your baby, some won't just becuase they think the cover is childish. Some will poke fun at it, some will tease it, but you've lost your chance to change it- you have to let it stand on it's own.
Kasia wrote: "Brandon wrote: " If it's not your kind of story, then maybe you shouldn't review it at all. "Sorry but that's absurd."
Agreed!
Jon Recluse wrote: "You should have seen how I reacted when I found paranormal romance in the horror section at the library. I used many bad words, in complex sentences. :)..."One of the used bookstores that I go to cut the horror section in half and added a paranormal romance section. Fine, I can ignore that section. But, in decreasing the size of the horror section they severely decreased the selection. Shelf after shelf of VC Andrews, Stephen King, Dean Koontz, John Saul, Anne Rice and little else.
I understand writers get defensive over their 'baby', I sure don't like it when people say bad stuff about my children... but, that's life, get a helmet.
Mod
The problem, IMO, is when reviews like that, plus the hate mail reviews, basically bury the legitimate reviews of a book. That "like" button Amazon has tends to be used more as a hindrance than a help in those cases.
My reaction is to feel sorry for the poor misinformed reader who doesn't get my genius lol- seriously I look for themes in all my reviews because even good ones can point out places for improvement.
Mod
One of the used boo..."
My bookstore doesn't have a horror section. But they expanded Romance and added two paranormal romance sections for YA and adults. They also cut the size of the science fiction/fantasy section.
Another of the used bookstores that I go to merged the horror section into mysteries/thrillers. Makes browsing for horror a real bitch!
Gregor wrote: "Ken wrote: "Look through some of the Amazon reviews for Edward Lee books. It is obvious that some of the reviewers never read horror more or less read splatter. You feel its fair for those guys to ..."I would so buy that book. :D
Mod
Mine, and my library, merged horror into general fiction.
Horror Aficionados
Books mentioned in this topic
The Cutting Room: Dark Reflections of the Silver Screen (other topics)Emma (other topics)
Emma (other topics)
Kiss Me Like You Love Me (other topics)
Kiss Me Like You Love Me (other topics)
More...
But they didn't like it enough apparently. Many writers expect only 5 stars and if they get anything less they lose their sh*t.