Fringe Fiction Unlimited discussion
Questions/Help Section
>
Why do Authors bash more successful book?
Literary snobbism has probably existed since Homer went around telling his stories. I don't think it will ever end. People can say Twilight isn't so well written, or vampires aren't supposed to sparkle, but what do we know? Stephenie Meyer is laughing all the way to the bank saying they do.
I don't think it's really an author thing, just a human thing. People like to give their opinions but sometimes, instead of doing it in a productive manner, they just insult things. They forget that just because they don't like something that doesn't mean it's bad. As an author, even when I don't like a book, I can appreciate that the writer put a lot of effort into it. There's a reason why I only rate books I've liked. And you're right, not everything has to be literature. The books I've written have been just for fun. I don't expect them to end up on a high school required reading list (and I actually hope they don't, because that would say a lot about education ;) so if someone rates them against great classics, of course they're not going to compare well, but I didn't write them to be considered that way. Everything needs to be taken for what it is.
It's like the quote by Einstein. If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it'll spend it's whole life believing that it's stupid.
Mod
Mod
I don't get the elitism some authors exhibit. Are some just bitter people aren't flocking to their books or do they truly have high, "earn an A in lit" standards for books?
This a fair complaint, and there is some history to understand in all of this.My personal perspective out of the way first. I honestly don't care if a book is super duper popular or virtually unknown, if it's badly written, as in misspelling and no grammar anywhere, I just won't recommend the book. I'm not a fan of author bashing myself, it doesn't help anything. And I always try to be fair.
Waaay back when, when Gen Xers were brimming with the newness of the post-punk era (late 70's - early 80's), it was understood to reject all commercialism in favor of substance over style. But then later, style made more money, and thus survived longer than substance. Many of my generation (not all of us are slackers, thank you) kept up the notion that popular = bad, because back when, that was guaranteed to be true. Now, not so much, and it's all gotten rather confusing. Yet, that idea, which seems to be the only one, was passed on to the next generations, to assume that popular equals bad, in some way or another. If not the writing, then the fanbase, or popularity, or whatever.
Something got miscommunicated somewhere down the line...
And now we're in the 21st century, and things have gotten reallymuddled. Do we assume popularity now means good now? Have things changed so much it's all been flipped around? No one seems to know anymore, not even me.
For some of us from an older generation, it's not mindless bashing. It's an expression of being disturbed that anything which really is badly written would become a standard for younger generations to copy, and erasing history. This isn't what we signed up for It's deeply disturbing. Trends are all fine and everything, but a populatity trend isn't a freaking religion.
So, my conclusion, it's more so the way the fans behave. The rest of us probably wouldn't mind so much if we all weren't immediately attacked and verbally beaten to death just because we have our own opinions and, guess what, just don't like a book that happens to be popular.
Hate or love a book all you want, but don't expect a popularity trend to be a substitute for freedom of speech... or common sense.
I have no problems stating exactly and precisely why the Twilight books didn't make me a fan. I found the total lack of choices for the characters personally offensive. The books could have involved any number of different grammar styles and my opinion would still stand.
i'll personally admit I don't like Twilight. I wont' go so far as to bash it in reviews or anything like that, i'll just simply say I don't like it. but I think i'm like that with any book that I just don't like (at least I hope i'm like that, and not just a huge dick about any book) same goes for movies.BUUUUT I do see other authors kinda take it to the extreme, which I think is what you are talking about? and you can't really know for sure why, but it can probably be thought as jealousy or just a snobbish opinion as to how far the literature world has fallen type of thing.
especially with the whole Self Publishing books becoming a bigger thing. and self publishers beginning to find a mild or very huge manner of success.
i'm probably rambling and not making sense but i'll also just say that with any amount of success there will be those that will just hate others, authors and readers alike.
I think it also has to do with mixed messages. I've seen a few blog posts where a few authors were irritated that a poorly written (typos, bad grammar, etc) but popular book gets glowing 5-star reviews, and their novels may have a typo or two and they get hammered by reviewers because of it.I also agree with Courtney and Wren that there's definitely an elitist culture within the literary scene. I suppose you can compare it to the Oscars where blockbusters that are popular and truly fun and entertaining seldom ever get nominated for best picture. How dare a book or movie be fun! ^_^
I just read a blog this morning that brought up the issue of writers being rough with each other. I'll quote some here and leave a link in case you want to read more. She talks about the difference she's noticed between groups that are primarily readers and ones that are primarily writers. Maybe the problem is insecurity among writers. The blog excerpt:
The readers groups I belonged to weren’t concerned about most of these things. Readers, who didn’t self-identify as writers as well, seemed to have no problems in being savvy consumers. They knew how to get the books they wanted and liked, and apparently read, rated, and reviewed to their hearts content.
Writers, on the other hand, seemed determined to scare the hell out of each other. They fretted that someone had to rescue poor innocent readers from buying books that they wouldn’t like. They fretted about the quality of some self-published writers reflecting poorly on all of them. They fretted that with all the competition of new writers publishing, readers would evaporate, forgetting that writers themselves were presumably readers too, and theoretically read more books than they wrote over a lifetime.
Some writers fretted about other people's cover art, or their proofing, or their rating & reviewing inclinations. Some bullied each other. Others were convinced they were being bullied by fellow authors. It was hard occasionally to figure out who was right, but I found it interesting that the readers, whose welfare the writers were vowing to protect, seemed happy enough to get along with each other and share ideas and favorite stories. (The only thing I ever saw close to the whole writing quality issue was a posting in a reading group that asked, almost apologetically, what was meant by a poorly written book and whether it was ok to like something declared to be that.)
I even read where reviews by another author didn't count, nor should a reader review an author they were GR friends with. I even saw where a writer should not thank a reader for a review, or have any contact at all.
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...
I don't know how true it all is since I don't write. If it is, it sure seems like there's a few people who want to put rules where most of us don't want them. But again, it could be that they're just insecure.
The readers groups I belonged to weren’t concerned about most of these things. Readers, who didn’t self-identify as writers as well, seemed to have no problems in being savvy consumers. They knew how to get the books they wanted and liked, and apparently read, rated, and reviewed to their hearts content.
Writers, on the other hand, seemed determined to scare the hell out of each other. They fretted that someone had to rescue poor innocent readers from buying books that they wouldn’t like. They fretted about the quality of some self-published writers reflecting poorly on all of them. They fretted that with all the competition of new writers publishing, readers would evaporate, forgetting that writers themselves were presumably readers too, and theoretically read more books than they wrote over a lifetime.
Some writers fretted about other people's cover art, or their proofing, or their rating & reviewing inclinations. Some bullied each other. Others were convinced they were being bullied by fellow authors. It was hard occasionally to figure out who was right, but I found it interesting that the readers, whose welfare the writers were vowing to protect, seemed happy enough to get along with each other and share ideas and favorite stories. (The only thing I ever saw close to the whole writing quality issue was a posting in a reading group that asked, almost apologetically, what was meant by a poorly written book and whether it was ok to like something declared to be that.)
I even read where reviews by another author didn't count, nor should a reader review an author they were GR friends with. I even saw where a writer should not thank a reader for a review, or have any contact at all.
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...
I don't know how true it all is since I don't write. If it is, it sure seems like there's a few people who want to put rules where most of us don't want them. But again, it could be that they're just insecure.
Mod
Bull.
Publishing houses want to sell people stories. It's a business, folks, and if your book is coming off like modern art or watered down versions of a prior bestsellers then it's not shocking people aren't tripping over themselves to snatch up stories people might not want to hear.
I love the book I'm writing but I don't write it like I'm going to be its number one fan. I switch things around and out because I want to include readers by giving them a story they can get into rather than assume I can talk them into loving something new and exciting. I'm not taking requests or pandering either but its foolish to dismiss what makes other books memorable/discussed.
Mod
Sometimes it's fun to munch popcorn.
Thanks for the link, Faerie! It's an Excellent blog post.
I think people forget that books aren't meant for everyone. and it kinda reminds me of this argument about the bible between my friend a hardcore Christian and my other friend an atheist. and they were both going at it that "No i'm right, you're wrong your a faggot," "no i'm right you're wrong fuck you" etc. it's no longer about loving what you love and leaving it at that, it's now about forcing what you love onto others. only here it's you're forcing your standards onto everyone else and if they don't comply all hell breaks loose.
Michael wrote: "I think people forget that books aren't meant for everyone. and it kinda reminds me of this argument about the bible between my friend a hardcore Christian and my other friend an atheist. and they ..."I don't think anyone is forgetting exactly. More like, and this is my impression, assuming that no one else is allowed to like/dislike a book if they didn't feel the same way.
I perceive a lot of insecurity and paranoia as an underlying cause.
At the same time, if a person honestly feels that a book is bad, and states the reasons why, that person has every right to express their opinion. But what we're seeing lately, goes far beyond stating opinions. It's almost this tribal behaviour of bashing others to make their opposing opinions to just go away. It's a dangerous and unheathy way of thinking.
Way back, I can recall many times when friends or classmates would express distaste for liking popular singers like Madonna or Michael Jackson because of that blind way of being a fan instead of sincerely enjoying the music. But never did I ever see or hear anyone go out of their way to literally bash anyone for it. They simply weren't invited to the same table at lunch, that's all.
Courtney wrote: "Something I struggle to understand and is becoming a gradual pet peeve of mine is authors talking about how "awful" popular books are.
A common complaint is how "poor" the writing is - Twilight an..."
We as writers shouldn't take our cue from Hollywood. After all, Hollywood hasn't had an original idea since The Day the Earth Stood Still. If we do the same thing, and recycle old ideas over and over again, there's never going to be another new idea. With Hollywood, it's understandable. It's going to cost $100,000,000 to make a movie, and no one wants to take a leap like that without a reasonable expectation of a return. So all we see are prequels, sequels, remakes, reboots, and "Based on the New York Times Best-seller!"
With us it's different. Our only investment is time, and paper and ink for those of us who write that way. We owe it to our readers to pull out all the stops and show them something they've never seen before. If the audience doesn't choose to accept those new ideas, then I suppose they get what they deserve.
Wait, what was the original thread again? Oh, yeah, book-bashing by other authors. Partly it's the knowledge that there is a finite amount of money being spent on books, and someone else is getting "my" share; mostly, just pure and simple jealousy... I put in all the work to write my epic/great/meaningful/earth-changing novel, and the readers are buying the one that idiot wrote! I must stop them!
Nobody knows how to relax anymore...
A common complaint is how "poor" the writing is - Twilight an..."
We as writers shouldn't take our cue from Hollywood. After all, Hollywood hasn't had an original idea since The Day the Earth Stood Still. If we do the same thing, and recycle old ideas over and over again, there's never going to be another new idea. With Hollywood, it's understandable. It's going to cost $100,000,000 to make a movie, and no one wants to take a leap like that without a reasonable expectation of a return. So all we see are prequels, sequels, remakes, reboots, and "Based on the New York Times Best-seller!"
With us it's different. Our only investment is time, and paper and ink for those of us who write that way. We owe it to our readers to pull out all the stops and show them something they've never seen before. If the audience doesn't choose to accept those new ideas, then I suppose they get what they deserve.
Wait, what was the original thread again? Oh, yeah, book-bashing by other authors. Partly it's the knowledge that there is a finite amount of money being spent on books, and someone else is getting "my" share; mostly, just pure and simple jealousy... I put in all the work to write my epic/great/meaningful/earth-changing novel, and the readers are buying the one that idiot wrote! I must stop them!
Nobody knows how to relax anymore...
Well, first of all, I highly take offense to the suggestion that I am being classist by expression my opinion that Twilight is garbage literature.I both know and have read from literary snobs and I am not one of them. Stephen King has been widely panned by the literary snobs because his books were popular. Ditto Charles Dickens, Raymond Chandler and John Grisham.
I enjoy all those authors and have nothing against popular success. I am not a simple minded literary critic who believes that if something does not live up to the ghost of William Faulkner that it is bad.
I also don't fall at the feet of writers like Johnathan Franzen, who (being a member of said literary elite) is given a free pass for his bad and boring writing and called a guenus.
I read Twilight and I read The Corrections (tried to read Freedom and just said-I can't do this)
Both books (Twilight and The Corrections) were terrible for different reasons.
Stephenie Meyer had a great idea and reached a good market and her skills in telling a story are above average.
Johnathan Franzen can write a great looking sentence, but the man couldn't tell an entertaining story if he was spotted twenty-thousand words by George R.R. Martin.
Franzen is a news guy, not a storyteller. At least Meyer is a storyteller. So that puts her above him, at least in my eyes.
But am I a member of some literary elite? No, I am not. Just a writer with an opinion. Do I write what the elites would consider literature? Hell no, I write books about serial killers and time travel and monsters. That kind of thing has never been their bag.
But here's the point, it's writing damn it, it's not taking out the trash or washing the car or doing the laundry.
It should be taken seriously. There are a set of rules that we must agree on if we are to communicate effectively and understand each other.
Can those rules be violated at times, sure they can (even William Strunk and E.B. White thought so) but a writer must know the rules and know why they are breaking them in order to be sure that they are doing more good than ill.
Why it's dangerous is simple, it's the same reason why I hate text speak and internet slang and all the rest of it. It bastardizes and destroys our language. People read those books (especially young people) and they believe that is the correct way to do things. Not only that, but it's just plain lazy. It's not giving the craft of writing the respect that it should be given.
And for the record, I'm not jealous of her success. I'd take her money if she wanted to give it to me, but I would not stand by those books. She can have all the damn success that she wants and great for her. I hope she makes a billion dollars, that has no effect on me at all.
What angers me is an approach to writing that is lazy and immature.
By the way, my wife loves the books and dragged me to the movies and I (this is embarrassing to admit) loved the movies.
I begrudge her for liking the books. I don't begrudge anyone for liking the books, but I don't appreciate her approach to writing.
Nor do I appreciate being lumped into the class of literary elite. If you knew me, you'd know that's about the farthest thing from the truth.
Mark wrote: "Well, first of all, I highly take offense to the suggestion that I am being classist by expression my opinion that Twilight is garbage literature.I both know and have read from literary snobs and ..."
I hope you don't feel signaled out, because I never felt that way. More so that Courtney decided to pose the question, more than likely because like a lot of people seeing too much author bashing, she might have felt a strong enough desire to post the question in this group, just to get a variety of opinions. (Correct me if I'm wrong Courtney, just my impression).
I often use VC Andrews as a prime example. Now her books really are trash literature, no argument from anyone. Yet the woman is dead and her books are still selling by the millions world-wide.
I suspect, like me as well as many others, there's frustration in trying to express opinions, and in some cases perhaps resentment, not because of bashing popular authors, but because of the opposite. Not being allowed to tell it like is. VC Andrews is trash, That's a fact. Are people allowed to enjoy the books regardless? Of course they are, that's understood.
But something shifted at some point. Instead of freely admitting VC Andrews is trash and a guilty pleasure for some, it's suddenly become this all out war where people aren't allowed to be honest anymore.
It's okay to enjoy trash. Really. It's just fine. No big deal. Also, it's perfectly okay to not like trash, regardless if the trash happens to be "popular."
One more thing (because I didn't say enough the first time) I don't bash indie authors. People who are just starting out or who haven't had a lot of success don't need that kind shot to the heart.But I will bash very successful authors if I think it's warranted. For one thing, why would they care what little, old, nobody me thinks? Also, they are making millions of dollars. Being criticized is part of the cost of being that successful.
It's why I won't boo college players but I will boo the professional sports teams-I'm looking at you, Detroit Lions.
The college kids are just trying to make it to the next level and learning the art of their sport. The pros are making millions of dollars and they should not be making mistakes.
They do, of course, they're only human.
And writers make mistakes too. A few mistakes is fine. Several mistakes is a little off-putting but can still be tolerated. A lot of mistakes and I'm booing.
To stretch the sports metaphor to a level that probably no one will understand. It's like the difference between being a little upset when Peyton Manning makes a bad pass and booing the hell out of Jeff Backus for allowing Julius Peppers to repeatedly sack Matt Stafford and send him to the injured reserved list.
God Backus, do your damn job! Protect the quarterback! Well, at least he's retired now.
I agree Lily. My gripe isn't with people who enjoy Stephenie Meyer (I did read Valley of the Dolls) it's with the writer. I don't care or judge what people enjoy. There are people that think a lot of the movies I like are crap-my wife more than anyone-that doesn't stop me from liking them.
Some people (Harold Bloom) think Stephen King is literary garbage. I disagree, but don't care what Mr. Bloom or any other critic thinks. I like Stephen King, he's my favorite author of all time and it isn't even close.
Now Harold Bloom really does think I'm an idiot-right along with anyone else who likes Stephen King or anyone who's popular.
That's literary elitism.
Mod
And you're damn right I felt singled out. Twilight was my example and I complained about it. I used a blog to help illustrate my point because 1. it's a good blog; 2. My wife is sleeping (up early with the children) and the Twilight books are on the shelf in our room and I didn't want to disturb her.So, yeah, I felt singled out.
Mark wrote: "One more thing (because I didn't say enough the first time) I don't bash indie authors. People who are just starting out or who haven't had a lot of success don't need that kind shot to the heart...."Erm, now I'm afraid I will have to signal you out. The notion that authors are making millions of dollars is false, basically a lie. Traditionally published authors get a grand total of 5% of each book sale. There's a good reason why they say, don't quit your day job. Authors are not millionaires, not one. Even Stephen King is still living in an old house in Maine, not a mansion. What does he do to continue an income so he doesn't go broke? Sell rights to film and TV, and more often than not, that equals some pretty bad productions.
I recently watched the TV mini series for Bag of Bones. I happen to really like that book, and feel it's one of his rare literary greats. The TV production was so heavy on the drama that I lost all sympathy for the characters before it reached the halfway point. I was rather disappointed. Would I bash King for this poorly done production? No.
This is the reality for authors. Sometimes, just to keep up some kind of income other than the measley royalty checks, they have to sell rights and risk really bad productions.
Think about that the next time you download a free book. People have to eat, whether you like it or not.
Mod
Classist authors are out there - ones who feel their novel is better than some other version that's won more sucesess or just jealousy that a simple idea/gimmick captures the imagination while netting sales. I'm glad you don't identify with that, Mark, nor would I think anyone in this group would support a dispicable pettiness that is rampant all over GR. I'm sorry if - for whatever reason - that my classist comparison to such individuals was personally directed at you.
I do stand by opinion, though, and think this book bashing tendency of well read people is getting to the extent of slut shaming. It exceeds personal preference and veers into "it's not respecting itself", "it's not keeping it classy", "it just wants attention" and other remarks.
"Any lawyer who would represent himself has a fool for a client" is a saying. I also think "Any author who thinks their own writing is better than other writers has a fool for a critic".
I'm not sure authors are subjective readers, especially when comparing their storytelling to others. That is a root of bashing books that leaves me unimpressed and an attitude teeming in the writing community.
Mod
Courtney wrote: "Ok, no. Sorry. I don't agree that bestseller books can get bashed with impunity but self-published unknowns get a pass because they're not too big to fail or whatever."Ultimately, it shouldn't matter either way. It's never about the author. It's about the story, and no one should mistake the author for the fiction. Authors aren't superheroes or role models. They're just people.
http://www.businessinsider.com/50-sha...E.L. James made $95 millions in just one year. Granted this has to be an exception but still... With that kind of money, who cares what people think of her writing. Heck, I wouldn't care for much less than that. :P
The bad reviews she got brought even more curious people to her books. I know. I'm one of them. I did buy it solely reading the bad reviews. I had to see for myself. Don't tell anyone, but I ended up buying the two sequels too. :p
Bad reviews? Bring them on, as long as the $$$ come with it, of course. ;)
Badly written or not, Inner Goddess fan or not, there was still something enjoyable in the books. I haven't read Twilight, I don't plan on reading the books either. Not because some people say they're bad, because that's never a reason for me not to try a book, but rather because I happened to see the movies (thanks to the hubby) and didn't particularly liked them. The first was different but all the others, I would never have watched if not, yet again, for the hubby so...
The same goes for most popular books these days such as Vampire Diaries, or Games of Thrones, Hunger Games, and not to forget Harry Potter. Neither of these books tempt me. Maybe because I happened to see the TV shows/movies before I realized they were taken from books. I was too busy reading the odd balls... :p
Mod
G.G. - I agree. Fifty Shades has happy fans so who cares what haters think? I couldn't finish the first book but that's me and it's absurd to call her a bad author since a trilogy of bestselling books would make any argument invalid.
I'm glad I started this discussion because it made me realize popular writing IS good writing regardless of literary merit. A story was told, people adored it, it stuck with them and that has value no matter what was in the prose or dialogue.
Lily, I have to disagree with you big time.Stephen King is worth $400 million dollars. He has two homes that I know of-one in Maine and one in Florida.
The one in Florida is most definitely a mansion.
He has made some money on movie rights, but mostly now he sells movie rights for one dollar. He has done this several times, including for The Mist and, I believe, The Shawshank Redemption.
He has made more money from his book sales than anything else and he has kept more than five percent.
Of course that's an advantage awarded to him by his success. To your original point, he has certainly made more money for the publisher than he himself has made.
Stephenie Meyer's net worth is 125 Million
J.K. Rowling was as high as 1 billion dollars
There are others that I won't look up: Patterson, Lisa Gardner, etc...
By the way, all those numbers came from Forbes.
Standard royalties for a first time author that is traditionally published is 10 to 12 percent for a hardcover and 6 to 8 percent for a paperback.
It's a very low percentage, but the publishing company is taking a lot of risk and they are investing all the money.
Also there are other rights to sell besides movie rights.
Foreign language rights, digital/audio rights, etc...
All those things have different splits that can be negotiated.
I will agree with you on one thing-most writers are not able to support themselves solely by writing. It's a ridiculously low percentage. But I'm not talking about those writers. I'm talking about the authors making millions of dollars because they are selling millions of books.
Courtney,When I bash a book or a writer, I don't do it as a writer, I do it as a reader. I am not comparing myself to Stephenie Meyer in a good or bad way.
She's been successful and good for her. I'm sure she's a good person and I'm glad that she has achieved her dream and is able never have to worry about supporting her children again.
But as a reader, I have problems with her book. Those are my opinions and, I feel, my right to express them.
I'm not trying to shame her into doing anything differently. As I said before, she won't ever even read anything I write about her, let alone give it any kind of thought.
What I'm trying to do is express my opinion about the quality of the writing.
She can write what how she wants and people can enjoy it if they want.
But I'm going to bash it if I think it's bad.
As far as trying to make her or anyone else feel bad about their writing-I don't have that kind of power and wouldn't want to wield it if I did.
That's what Harold Bloom does, that's what those snobbish people at The New Yorker do. They sit around and wonder where all the great writers went to.
They try to shame the popular writers into retirement so they will cease to flood the world with their "drivel"
This is a horrible and snobby attitude and one that I do not share.
Courtney wrote: "Too true, Lily. Authors are only human and can't be expected to please everyone with a single story.G.G. - I agree. Fifty Shades has happy fans so who cares what haters think? I couldn't finish..."
Heh, I couldn't read it either. I honestly don't give a rat's ass if something happens to be popular or not. But I do care if a book is physically damaging to the eyes.
I'm not bashing, I really am stating a fact. I have some eye damage due to health reasons, it't not a big deal and doesn't prevent me from reading or writing. It slows me down sometimes, but that's it. Trying to read Fifty Shades made my eyes trip over sentences so much just trying to make sense out of the writing that I was literally in pain and had to stop after one chapter.
I personally have an issue with a book that's so badly written it really can hurt people. I don't knw the author and for all I know she's the biggest sweetheart anyone could meet. Her writing on the otherhand, is damaging.
Side note, that's 95 million for three movies and unless she pulls off a miracle and writes another trilogy that matches the popularity of Fifty Shades, chances are, her writing career is already over and sold for 95 million. I find that sad more than anything else.
Mark, no one has the right to bash for any reason. Bottom line. You want to earn millions? You'll have to work for it like anyone else. Bashing doesn't get anyone anywhere.
Popular writing is good regardless of merit? I'm sorry but I just couldn't disagree more. You complain about people bashing a book they haven't read and then make that statement?
That a book is good merely by being popular?
Not at all, not for a second, not by any merit whatsoever. No, just no and no and no.
That's not using your brain or your judgement. That's crowd think. That's ridiculous.
It's moral relativism to it's most absurd degree.
If a majority of people around the world thought that the World Trade Center attacks were a good thing, would that make them good?
OF COURSE NOT!
Popularity is not a barometer for what's good just like it isn't a barometer for what's bad.
And see that kind of thinking (what's popular must be good) is the problem.
If there was no objective way to judge a book or a film or a painting then criticism wouldn't make any sense.
Of course there is room for opinion in criticism but there is also room for objective merit.
Paintings are composed of things like shading, and perspective and...other stuff (I don't know about paintings)
Movies are composed of acting performs, direction, lighting, editing.
Those things can be judged. There is some room for personal opinion but a lot of it can be objectively judged.
Writing is no different. There is narration, dialogue, description, characterization, pacing.
Those things can be objectively judged.
Call me a snob because I think that writing should have standards.
But a book is popular so it's good? No...just no.
Also, I am not the only one who shares the opinion that being successful has a cost of judgement from others.Raise your hand if you've never judged:
An actor
Or Miley Cyrus
Or Justin Bieber
Never read a story or watched a news report where paparazzi are hounding a celebrity.
Never said anything bad about Britney Spears.
Never said anything about Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian.
These people are easy fodder, but writers are hands-off?
Nope, I'm not so in love with my chosen vocation that I can make that statement.
Sorry, but if you're in the limelight you're going to get judged.
And that sports metaphor is about as apt as can be.
Mod
Any opinion you couldn't say about a book to it's author's face is one you should reconsider. If you wouldn't tell them you think they're one of the worst authors in the business, then it's not cool to say it behind their back.
Life's too short to bitch about books when you could discuss ones you actually enjoyed.
That's too P.C. for me Lily. Some people do what they do poorly and I'm not going to sugarcoat it or be dishonest about it. Sorry if you don't like it, but some people do deserved to get bashed.I just read a truly awful book by a self-published author (no one on here, but I'm not naming names) and I decided that I wasn't going to give it a review. Why? Because that author might see my review and it might really affect his life. Might make him want to stop writing, I don't know what it's going to do.
If, by some one in a million shot, Stephenie Meyer sees my post about her writing is that going to make her stop writing, change her life? No, she's not going to care because she's already made it. She's gotten all the validation she needs.
I don't want to hurt people, but I feel pretty safe that I'm not going to hurt a millionaire. Someone just starting out...I might.
Plus, I don't know what bashing an author and me earning millions has to do with each other?I'm not trying to be a literary critic (there's a profession where no one earns millions) and I don't see how bashing another writer will help me sell books.
It won't. The two have nothing to do with each other.
What I will do is state my opinion. As will you *cough* fifty shades *cough*
Mark wrote: "Also, I am not the only one who shares the opinion that being successful has a cost of judgement from others.Raise your hand if you've never judged:
An actor
Or Miley Cyrus
Or Justin Bieber
Never ..."
Well, you're in the limelight right now and we are all judging you. How do you feel about that? Wait, you already said how you feel. You take resentment from being judged even though you freely admit, repeatedly, that you openly bash successful authors for making more money than you. So, according to your own opinions, you are not "hands-off," you put yourself in the spotlight and we all have the right to bash you. I'm using your words.
As a writer, you should know the definition of hypocrisy.
Here's what I would tell Stephenie Meyer to her face:Your writing isn't very good.
The syntax is sloppy.
Your characters are flat and lifeless
You've been very successful, congratulations.
In no way have I tried to be mean to Stephenie Meyer in anything I've written. I didn't say she was a bad person, I didn't attack her personally. I think she could have done a much better job with her book.
Those are not subjective opinions, those are objective facts. Some of her sentences would be cause for lost points on a seventh-grade essay. That's just a fact.
It's lazy writing and it's offense to me as a reader. I'm paying money for what you're bringing me and when I see those kinds of mistakes it takes me out of the story and makes me think about your grammar.
The thing about good, clear, writing is that you don't think about the grammar or the punctuation. The words fall away and you can just enjoy the story.
That's the problem with her books.
It doesn't have to be Shakespeare, it just has to be competently written.
Mod
Your last several posts have consisted of rationalizing why it is okay to judge others because they are sucessful and that makes it okay to turn them into convinent targets.
However this became a personal attack against you I don't know because you have turned a generalized topic into some platform advocating people's right to mock strangers.
If you want to keep this tone, please do it in another group. I would rather not have to moderate posts for members disrespecting one another because they have differing opinions.
I'm not bashing them for making more money than me! That's ridiculous. I don't know how many more times I have to say that for people to get it.You see, everyone wants to make this about jealousy, I don't know why. Perhaps because people judge in others what they see in themselves.
It's not about jealousy. Just because Stephenie Meyer makes a ton of money doesn't mean I can't as well. It's not a zero sum game.
I feel more free to bash those that are ultra successful because they will care less about what I have to say. In fact, they won't care at all. That absolves me from the guilt of hurting someone's feelings if I say what they've written isn't very good.
If I say to someone who isn't successful that what they've written isn't very good, I might hurt their feelings. Maybe not, I try to be constructive, but it is possible that I might.
If I tell Stephenie Meyer I don't think her writing is good-even if it's right to her face-what the hell does she care? She already has a bunch of other people eating up her books. I'm not hurting her feelings by doing that. She is less fragile because she's made it.
And bash away, I'm clearing not backing down or crying off, just defending what I'm saying, so I'm in the spotlight, fine.
And you, Lily, as a writer should be able to read the words I write and see that I'm not bashing writers because they are making more money than me.
And Courtney, I really like you to address that completely indefensible thing you said about how popular=good.
Mark wrote: "Here's what I would tell Stephenie Meyer to her face:Your writing isn't very good.
The syntax is sloppy.
Your characters are flat and lifeless
You've been very successful, congratulations.
In no ..."
In... your... opinion.
I'm not a fan of the Twilight books. In my personal humble opinion, they're perfectly competently written, for mindless entertainment. I've never seen the books as great literature, and anyone can argue various grammar styles until the cows come home and still not reach a resolution. Just because someone doesn't like a book, does not give them the right to claim it's bad writing. The writing is fine. Perhaps not perfect within your personal choice of grammar styles, but that's irrelevant. Bashing is still bashing.
So basically what we're saying is that negative reviews are not allowed. Anytime, ever, against anyone. Because they might hurt someone's feelings?That's intellectually dishonest.
Lily, there are rules to grammar. They are known. They are taught. Her books are not well-written. They do not adhere to good grammar or style. This is not about the tone of her books or the pacing. This is about her ability to form consistently good sentences...she can't.
Mod
Apparently this whole thread isn't written in invisible ink that only Mark can see...
Mod
If anyone would like to continue this discussion as a generalized, impersonal query of why authors of popular novels are bashed, please feel free to contribute your opinions and show the usual respect we share for one another in this group.
Thank you.
I wasn't going to address all the posts in between anyway: 47 is a bit too many to take into account. ^^First, I think it depends a lot on what we understand when the word "bashing" is used. (Much like "a reader gave my book a 1-star" doesn't equal "bullying", but I see more and more people using that word to mean exactly that, disregarding what true bullying is. But that's a matter for another thread.) For some, "bashing" means truly trashing a book, insulting its author, being mean for no reason, etc. For others, it simply means writing a negative review, no matter how well you argument, point out at what you found wrong, and basically show (not only tell—oh, hah, didn't see that one coming) what you thought was wrong. It's all in the eye of the beholder. (For the record, as far as I'm concerned, bashing is definitely the first definition, not the second.)
As someone who writes, even though I can't really call myself a full-fledged author yet, I have the nagging feeling that as authors, we're somehow expected to behave differently when it comes to talking about books. As if we weren't not allowed to express our opinions anymore, or had to constantly tread on eggs at the least ("you're in the same boat, so you should understand"). I don't know how it goes with other people, but I have no problems compartmentalising. When I read and review a book, it's always as a reader, not as author—and I get really annoyed when someone says "well you're just jealous because the author is popular and you aren't" (that's too easy a cop-out). So E.L. James and Stephenie Meyer managed to make money and be popular? Hey, good for them. It doesn't mean I'm supposed to like their books. (Same with indie authors. I empathise, really I do, but if the writing's gone to the dogs and the story's awful, why wouldn't I say it?)
As a reader, I can probably sometimes be seen as someone who trashes books, because sometimes, too, some novels will leave me utterly frustrated and annoyed. I suppose I could just refrain from reviewing, but... the hell, why should I keep mum when "normal" readers (= non-authors) don't? When the writing style is so bad it makes my eyes water, I can't help but being annoyed. When a character who happens to be close to me in demographics/personality/gender/whatever is portrayed in a way I find insulting, I feel bad and want to express it. (To use the Twilight and 50SoG examples, both Bella and Ana were infuriating IMHO because they were basically non-active characters, the epitome of "weak females" submitting to The Male, and it really doesn't appeal to me. Among other things.)
When it comes to "popular" books, to me, it just means they've managed to appeal to a large audience. Sometimes an author is part of it, sometimes s/he's not, just like other readers. But because we also happen to write doesn't mean we shouldn't express our opinions (I bet they'll most always seem like bitching and bashing to a fan anyway, no matter how toned-down they are.)
By the way, I'm also seriously tired of the "if you don't like it, don't read it" argument. (To which I answer: well, duh, I read it because I wanted to make my own opinion, of course. If I hadn't, I'd be called a troll and a bully for criticising a book I didn't read. Damned if I do, damned if I don't? ^^) But I'm probably veering off-target here. I'm not sure anymore what point exactly I was trying to make. Apologies in advance if my post wasn't too clear, I haven't had my morning coffee pot yet.
I read for enjoyment, I write for enjoyment. Success is not something I expect, merely creative release. Since joining this site, I have read reviews from a few of my favorite authors that were highly critical of other's work. It made me lose respect for each critical reviewer.
A common complaint is how "poor" the writing is - Twilight an ever-infamous target and example - but obviously there are millions of international readers and publishing houses that would disagree. Popular isn't quality, of course, but why does everyone act like books are required to be literature instead of entertainment for whatever demographic?
Movies and television don't always pretend to be more than entertainment, so why do authors feel the need to argue with millions of fans about what books they should be reading or begrudging authors for telling a successful story?
I just feel it's harsh to cite literary techniques and say authors are "telling a story wrong" essentially. I could make an argument that if nobody wants to hear a story, then it must not be worth telling but few authors appreciate that outlook.
It truly just baffles me that authors are constantly subjecting each other to unsolicited peer reviews when anyone who ever attempted to write a book would likely say they shared a story they liked the best way they knew how.