Fringe Fiction Unlimited discussion
Questions/Help Section
>
Why do Authors bash more successful book?
Dan wrote: "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 h..."
Well said, sir, a true voice of reason running through this somewhat hostile thread. It almost seems like nobody knows how to relax anymore...
Since joining this site, I have read reviews from a few of my favorite authors that were h..."
Well said, sir, a true voice of reason running through this somewhat hostile thread. It almost seems like nobody knows how to relax anymore...
I feel that authors may bash popular books because their own books aren't selling as well: We call that jealousy. That is the only reason I can think of. I LOVE the Harry Potter books, and even though I started writing, I still feel that those books are all that in a bag of kettled cooked potato chips.
It seems like some of us are using different definitions to others. I took these from Urban Dictionary:1. criticizing or defaming
2. hating and violently attacking someone or something on sight
3. Criticising or insulting, in a derogatory manner, something which you don't like. Usually refers to different cultures or countries.
Bashing is, as far as I'm concerned, separate to acceptable criticism because it involves cruelty and vitriol.
I think jealousg is the easiest reason to come up with but more and more it feels like just having the need to have others accept your opinion as fact. It's kinda like telling your friend to read a book you love so they lovd it too. You want them to love it. You need them to love it. Sometimes that attitude is harmless but add it with an extreme dislike for a book and you need others to acknowledge that you are right, Shit can get nasty fast.
Jealousy is a surface emotion and it's always insecurity in disguise. All bullies of any kind, are insecure by nature.Which, to me, begs a bigger question. What's making authors insecure and feeling the need to validate themselves using hate?
I'm starting to wonder about this thread. Saying publicly you didn't like something, be it a book, a TV show, movie or anything really, isn't bashing. People are allowed to their opinion. Not everything will please everyone. And it's a good thing or there wouldn't be any diversity.It's not because the majority of people loved something that one has to love it also.
What is mind-boggling is that when the reasons for not liking something aren't given, people complain, and yet, when someone does write them down, they become bashers?
I'm sorry to disagree but that's why there are so many styles, genres etc. What someone doesn't like could very well be what someone else will love.
G.G. wrote: "I'm starting to wonder about this thread. Saying publicly you didn't like something, be it a book, a TV show, movie or anything really, isn't bashing. People are allowed to their opinion. Not every..."I agree, which is why I've been trying to express that it's okay to not like something, just as much as it's okay to like something, regardless if everyone agrees or not. Ultimately, none of this matters all that much.
Personally, it puts me on edge just as much when I see/hear people giving mindless praise for no reason, as it does to see/hear people bashing for no reason.
I would rather see the different opinions regardless if I personally agree or not. At worse, simply agree to disagree, and move on.
This is a topic I have mixed feelings on. For authors, yes, jealously (or on occasion, a personal animosity from some prior dealing)is the usual reason for bashing. No doubt. However, in the case of certain books, I think it may stem more from frustration with something that is by all accounts not very good (or outright bad) having a large cultural impact. Not necessarily out of jealousy, but irritation that the younger readers/viewers (if there's a movie adaptation) are going to make something lousy their standard for a particular genre. And once something becomes popular, it gets imitated into being a trend, at which point it starts saturating everything and blocking other work out.
Yeah I agree G.G. same with Virginia's point about the definition. Somewhere along the line here it got muddled. To me bashing is the forceful and hateful (not one or the other but both tied tied like a thick string) nature of someone forcing on you or the author that that book is bad.
Patrick, well said, and the same as my thoughts. Lowered standards, frustration, irritation, etc. Yet, on the other hand, going so far as outright bashing, doesn't help anything, and if anything, it lowers standards even more.I would love nothing more than to see standards raised. I live for a good creative challenge and rising above to meet a new standard would be awe-inspiring for me. Granted, not everyone feels the same way. For some, raised standards makes them feel insecure and resentful.
There's definitely a lot of mixed feelings, and more than likely, this whole thread could be easily broken into a number of different topic discussions.
Yeah, bashing is pretty much a worthless venture (though I'll admit, there are certain authors I will go on a toot about if my opinion/support for it is asked directly).And I'm completely with you on the creative front. As an author, nothing wearies me more than going into a section in a bookstore and seeing a thousand different shades of the same cover glaring at me from the shelves.
I just wish people were more willing to push themselves into making something original.
Patrick wrote: "Yeah, bashing is pretty much a worthless venture (though I'll admit, there are certain authors I will go on a toot about if my opinion/support for it is asked directly).And I'm completely with yo..."
Ah, there's no accounting for free will. For creative types, they have to want it, and that want is the only obligation. Everything else is optional. It works both ways. No one has to like a book because others like it, and no one has to hate a book because others hate it. It's your choice.
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 wonder if Mark had used the word criticize instead of bash, he would have been allowed to stay.
Readers have the right to criticize books they don't like. But suddenly authors aren't, though most are first and foremost readers ourselves.
If I don't like a book, I will say so. If I like it, I will say that too. That's why I joined Goodreads. To talk about the books I read. I rarely mention the author in my reviews. That is where I think the line should be drawn...just my opinion. Criticize the work, not the author.
Mod
I am curious if it's rooted in insecurity more than ego. People always say bullies are insecure and lash out so bashing might be a way to elevate their sense of self through negative opinions.
Lily wrote: "Patrick wrote: "Yeah, bashing is pretty much a worthless venture (though I'll admit, there are certain authors I will go on a toot about if my opinion/support for it is asked directly).And I'm co..."
Indeed. It's a world of different strokes.
Lena wrote: "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 litera..."
To be clear, no one was trying to make anyone leave, and if anyone did try to do that, I personally would speak up immediately, no matter who it happens to be.
Words are just words, and often the written word is open to interpretation. I'm sure we could all argue or discuss definitions for a very long time, but discussing definitions isn't really the point of this thread.
You did hit the nail on the head. Criticizee the work, not the author. And that's where I feel there's a problem. Lack of critical thinking. Not everyone of course, this thread is certainly evidence that's not the case. But when it is the case, why do authors then take that unneeded extra step to outright bashing, specifically?
Lily wrote: "Lena wrote: "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 rea..."
The lack of inhibition/repercussions that comes from being on the internet for one.
Lena wrote: "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 litera..."
Mark got kicked out?
G.G. wrote: "Lena wrote: "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 rea..."
No, nothing like that. Simply some were offended, things got heated, it's another day, things have calmed down.
OK! I'm glad to hear that because there would have been no reasons. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.Thanks for clarifying. :)
Mod
Patrick wrote: "Lily wrote: "Lena wrote: "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..."
from my perspective, I don't feel that's a fair statement. One could say the same about a phone or a movie.
Recently, a friend of mine had seen the movie "Noah" and posted an epic rant on Facebook expressing his disappointment. I thanked him for saving me money for seeing the movie myself. He teased me and said, I'm glad my pain saved at least one person ;)
He's a sci-fi writer, currently working on his first novel. In the face of this movie that greatly disappointed him, he worried his book has too much, if that would be rejected by all. I told him, I have that same anxiety all the time, and I've concluded once the book is as finished as I can make it on my own, if an agent or publisher decides something needs to be cut, I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. There's no point worrying for the meantime.
I'm sure many would argue there's so much crap out there in all forms of media, and I personally wouldn't disagree. But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter. Authors make commitments. Anyone who's going to let the internet, a movie, an iPhone distract them, hasn't made a commitment to being an author.
I would say bashing successful books stems from jealously. I would never bash a book, being an author myself, regardless of how bad it is. To me you have to respect the craft itself. Insulting another writer's work demeans the entire writing process. You have to understand that someone put time and effort into the book, regardless of its nature.
I've had my work and writing picked apart by wanna-be critics, but these people were just trying to push my buttons.
T.A. wrote: "I would say bashing successful books stems from jealously. I would never bash a book, being an author myself, regardless of how bad it is. To me you have to respect the craft itself. Insulting an..."
Heh, I had one critic tell me I should try writing short stories before attempting a book when he read my novella. Never mind the fact that at the time I had already published five short stories...
Full disclosure here. I'm not just talking out of my ass. I have experience bashing and bullying firsthand, many times. I honestly wouldn't voice opinions, and would instead phrase things as questions only, if I chose to participate in a discussion where I don't have direct personal experience.
Hmm? What's not a fair statement? Regarding lack of inhibition/repercussions (sorry if I'm wrong, Goodreads' reply system gets a little garbled when it's quoting only the beginning of a comment)?
Lily I actually made the mistake of posting my book advertisement on reddit in an area that wasn't meant for it. I accepted my mistake and reposted it. Two people there just picked apart my writing and me as a person. Mind you I made a rookie mistake but they never let me off the hook and used profanity. Responding to people like this only makes it worse and makes the Author look bad, but I responded anyways, because people like that need to be put in their place. I later deleted the comments though and the post.I've always stood up to bullies and online bullying to me is just as bad as face-to-face bullying.
Patrick wrote: "Hmm? What's not a fair statement? Regarding lack of inhibition/repercussions (sorry if I'm wrong, Goodreads' reply system gets a little garbled when it's quoting only the beginning of a comment)?"Oh lol Yeah, there is that. Also, not all comments will post right away, which can also lead to confusion.
I was referring to:
"The lack of inhibition/repercussions that comes from being on the internet for one."
T.A. wrote: "Lily I actually made the mistake of posting my book advertisement on reddit in an area that wasn't meant for it. I accepted my mistake and reposted it. Two people there just picked apart my writing..."Agreed :)
Ah. Well, regarding what you said earlier ("why do authors then take that unneeded extra step to outright bashing, specifically?"), I'm inclined to stick to my guns. There really is no more faceless way to vent displeasure, or to reach a vast audience and have that message stick around for an extended period.
Patrick wrote: "Ah. Well, regarding what you said earlier ("why do authors then take that unneeded extra step to outright bashing, specifically?"), I'm inclined to stick to my guns. There really is no more faceles..."Interesting. That shifts the focus to a question of instant gratification. You can see the results right away on the internet.
Very true. It's fast, easy, and in many ways, more measurable in terms of effect. In addition, it potentially puts one in a position where other people will actually echo your opinion and give it additional support.
Patrick wrote: "Very true. It's fast, easy, and in many ways, more measurable in terms of effect. In addition, it potentially puts one in a position where other people will actually echo your opinion and give it a..."Perhaps it is more about ego online than insecurity. Or maybe both equally. I've often noticed whenever a thread explodes, the underlying cause is that the majority isn't reflecting one person's opinion, thus causing frustration and a vicious cycle. I've also noticed many times that not everyone who chats online has the ability that would allow them to accept they're talking to a real person who has different opinions and their purpose isn't to echo.
Alas, I am generalizing. I've never felt it's a majority. I've always seen it as a minority (in terms of percentage), while there are plenty of people more than capable of discussions online.
Mod
Courtney wrote: "Whatever miscommunications were suffered are an isolated incident compared to the usual enthusiasm and support of this group."From what I've seen, it's part of those topics that are almost 100% bound to cause disagreement. Not because it's this group specificially, just in general.
T.A. wrote: "To me you have to respect the craft itself. Insulting another writer's work demeans the entire writing process. You have to understand that someone put time and effort into the book, regardless of its nature."
I agree with respecting the craft itself, but as much as I understand how hard it is, "putting time and effort" is only good if the result is good. Just like with any work, if the result is crappy, the boss and/or the customers won't be happy. It's harsh, but it's the way it is.
Of course, this is, again, in general. Deliberate insults, name calling, and other behaviours that are directed at an author and not at his/her craft are a different matter. The reddit part would fall in the latter category, from what I understand.
I've concluded that in life, there's two kinds of work. One is the kind that involves blood, sweat, and tears, yet at the end of the day, you can be proud of what you've accomplished. There other kind of work also involes blood, sweat, and tears, but the end result leaves you disatified, and that disatisfication (is that a word?) is often reinterpreted in a million different ways.Perhaps the bashing comes from recognizing the underlying shame an author might feel, whereas an author who's satisfied, won't come across as an easy target for the less than insecure. Thoughts?
Envy and insecurity, mainly, I think. Sometimes those come disguised as elitism/snobbery, but envy and insecurity are the underlying causes.
I never understood it either. Twilight for one, and 50 Shades is another that I've heard constantly bashed. I liked them both. (Not the entire series. I didn't love the ending of either.) But that's my personal opinion. Obviously readers all look for something different in a book. I tend to go into a book with low expectations. I read for entertainment, to escape every day life. Honestly, I've read quite a few books that had typos and or styles I didn't like, but were they entertaining? Yes. And, consequently, I'm rarely disappointed. :)
Anne wrote: "I never understood it either. Twilight for one, and 50 Shades is another that I've heard constantly bashed. I liked them both. (Not the entire series. I didn't love the ending of either.) But that..."Also there's a huge market for those types of books. People seem to forget that. I'd like to sell that many books, but why waste energy hating? Use that to write instead, I say.
Anne wrote: "I read for entertainment, to escape every day life." "but were they entertaining? Yes. And, consequently, I'm rarely disappointed. :)"Well put!
Courtney wrote: "I really disapprove of "bashing". It's not the same as disliking something because it's about getting insulting and mean. When I hear of people "bashing" a book there's something aggressive to th..."I agree wholeheartedly
Anne wrote: "Honestly, I've read quite a few books that had typos and or styles I didn't like, but were they entertaining? Yes. And, consequently, I'm rarely disappointed. :)..."
For me, it depends on the rest of the book. Typos will drive me insane if I'm barely holding on to my interest. If the story is good, I notice them but it doesn't detract from my enjoyment at all.
I don't believe in bashing a book. That's just me personally. Can reviews write a negative review? Of course. Can reviewers say they didn't like a book? Of course. But people shouldn't be cruel or mean for no reason. State the reasons why you didn't like the book. But don't go off calling the author names or making assumptions about them because you didn't like what they wrote. That's something that I can't condone. If I see an author bash another author that just makes me not want to read anything by the author doing the bashing. It just turns me off to their book and is a guarantee that I won't read their books because their behavior is unwarranted and not something I can agree on. Just to be clear I don't have a problem with authors saying that they don't like a fellow author's book. Author's are readers too and have the same rights as any reader to express their opinion. I don't care if one author likes someone elses book or not; if I find their book to be something I want to read then I'll read it. Its the bashing and unnecessary cruelty I can't stand.
I also don't like or agree with people rating books that they haven't read or giving bad ratings because some of their friends or people they follow didn't like the book, without they themselves reading the book.
Right. You should always be cruel or mean for a good reason.;)
Lily wrote: "Right. You should always be cruel or mean for a good reason.;)"
lol :D
At the same time everyone has a certain right to an opinion over something meant to entertain. Laurell K Hamilton is by all measures a thousand times more successful than me in every aspect, but I'm still going to call her work out for being the highly offensive inarticulate garbage I feel it is. To paraphrase a friend, if that gets Laurell down she can wipe her tears away with fist fulls of hundred dollar bills.
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'm really uncomfortable with this example. Those two positions imo are not interchangeable or equally defensible.
As an aside, wow he didn't like Rose Madder? I loved that book. Okay back on topic...
T.A. wrote: "I would say bashing successful books stems from jealously. I would never bash a book, being an author myself, regardless of how bad it is. To me you have to respect the craft itself. Insulting an..."
whoa hang on, I don't do break downs of LKH's books because I'm jealous of her. I wouldn't trade places with her if I could. I think I have a right to be an author AND a reviewer.
i don't bash books publicly :) but if i have some issue with it, i usually explain why i disliked said book. i'm not a big fan of meyers, james, and rice, (i have a plethora of explainations) and i can usually pick apart why i disliked the books for a variety of reasons. but i don't publicly, as it comes off as petty and jealous. I don't want to come off as a hack writer trying to push my books, appearing as if I have some kind of agenda.
I remember all too well, way back when, people would turn their noses down at those they perceived as bahaving like fanatics, instead of simply enjoying out of their own feel will. But things did shift at some point, and it's become, well, bashing, regardless of how you define it.
Back in high school, no one bashed. We just didn't invite certain people from certain cliques to our table at lunch, and that was it. Nowadays, that's not enough. Now, there's this attitude of, must bash and force everyone to think whatever I think. It defeats the whole point of freedom of speech...
I find it unfortunate. I really feel (and yes this is talking rather ideally), if everyone simply put aside this false assumption that we all have to think and feel the exact same way, then any discussion would open wide and we could freely talk about the specifics we didn't like, or did like, as the case may be, which in turn could possibly lead to new insights.
I didn't like Stephen King's Rose Madder when I read it. At the time, I honestly felt it was one of his worse books. Again, at the time, my mind wandered to a mumber of possibiities. A man writing from the perspective of woman, sometimes that can go horribly wrong. Too polically correct? Art and politics are like oil and vinegar. Yet, these were just thoughts, impressions. I kept them to myself and shrugged it off.
Years later, I read King's On writing, and I was surprised to see him talking about how he wasn't happy with Rose Madder. He wrote that the book was his attempt at a plot-driven story, instead of charater-driven. At which point I went, ohhh.... it all makes sense now.
That shrugging things off, I perceive as sorely lacking these days. Just, let it go...