Q&A with Josh Lanyon discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
ARCHIVE (General Topics)
>
What else are you reading? (June 2010 - May 2013) *closed*
Cris wrote: "Candice wrote: "I have a friend as dear to me as anyone on the planet and she and I have lived together a couple of times. But I would not want pics of us taken that clearly imply what these do abo..."Very true. You can only extrapolate so much fm pics alone. However, reading their biographies, there is more than that to go on. Not that I'm eager to believe what I want to believe or anything...
Have started the first Alex Beecroft Under the Hill story. It was kind of hard to follow and to visualize, most particularly at the start. However, she's such a wonderful storyteller; I've got my head deeply into it already--I'm guessing a bunch of the rest of us are doing the same thing about now.
Mod
Finally finished Irregulars. And after reading it, I want to start re-reading it straight away. :PAlso finished Written in the Stars. The main character's personality was so much fun to read about. Really light on angst and smirk-inducing, so I'm marking it down as a pick-me-up.
I recently finished
. I know it was partially written with the aid of her readers, but it doesn't have the feel of being written by committee. As always, it was an exellent read, she is one of my favourites. I liked the way the story unfolded slowly, no infodumps but as you read, her world became clear, also the people in it was unveiled slowly, no-one was how you thought they were to begin with. A very thought provoking book too.Now I am reading
. Alice Hoffman is a writer that both my daughter and I enjoy, she is the one who recommended it to me. It is a interesting look into a shattered mind and how it affects a family when one member is having trouble, but don't see it that way herself.
Jordan wrote: "Ooohh, Alex Beecroft, I really liked False Colors I have a few anthologies that she's in, though I have yet to read them. I can't wait!"The only one of hers I have read is shining like the sunwhich is a contemporary book set in Cornwall, England and one I liked very much. I get the impression most of her books are historical romances?
Anne wrote: "I recently finished . I know it was partially written with the aid of her readers, but it doesn't have the feel of being written by committee. As always, it was an exelent read"Hi, Anne! I'm reading it just now. It was the first thing I bought after my Lent's new books' moratorium ended ;-). It's great!
Mod
I agree with you 100%. :) The Starving Years has very beautiful moments when each of the guys are described through their actions and through each other's eyes. And like you said, when the story proceeds, no-one is what they at first appeared to be: For example the way Javier with his damaged eye often sees the situations more clearly than others and the way independent Nelson is forced to rely on other people. :)
Mod
. I know it was partially written with the aid of her readers, but it doesn't have the feel of being written by committee. As always, ..."Enjoy, Antonella! You are in for a treat! :)
Finished! 5 stars, like usual for JCP.BTW your review was beautiful, dear Johanna.
I tend to write a review only if I give 3 stars or less, because with 4/5 stars ratings it is clear what I think. I'd like to write enthusiastic reviews going with the 4/5 stars, if I only would find the time...
Anne wrote: "Jordan wrote: "Ooohh, Alex Beecroft, I really liked False Colors I have a few anthologies that she's in, though I have yet to read them. I can't wait!"The only one of hers I have read is shining ..."
Yes, Anne, and boy do I envy you having those books to look forward to. Ms B is really something special, particularly in historical mode. (I'm almost through w/Under the Hill part 1 which is a blend of present and past, and I'm so mad that I have to wait for the next part to come out.)
Mod
BTW your review was beautiful, dear Johanna.
I tend to write a review only if I give 3 stars or less, because with 4/5 stars ratings it is clear what I thin..."
Thank you, Antonella. That is very kind of you. :) And I agree with you that it takes time to write a review - that's why I can't do it as often as I would like to. And that's why I do it only with the books I give 4/5 stars (ETA: and are my favorites). With books like that I feel they are worth the effort and the time I have too little to spare anyway. :) For me the biggest time consuming thing is doing it in English and after putting quite a bit of effort into the writing, I still often afterwards feel I couldn't find the right words.
I envy Emanuela and others who write reviews of all the books they read! I think it's so admirable!!! :)
Mod
This looks really wonderful. I think I bought it...
Mod
..."
This is absolutely true. And I do very much -- and I sincerely mean this -- appreciate positive reader reviews (and positive reviews from critics).
But I was reading a post today about yet another reviewer upset because an author or an author's loyal readers jumped all over her for a negative review. If I understand correctly, the reviewer was threatening to quit reviewing because of the negative feedback she was getting for negative reviews. And I find this unreasonable.
Reviewers are writers. And furthermore they are the first in line to remind the rest of us writers that we should not take criticism personally. Reviews can be helpful to writers, but -- as we are continually reminded -- reviews are NOT for writers. So reviewers insisting that writers be grateful for any review is just...illogical.
I am not grateful for a lousy review. :-D It is naive to expect that I would be.
And what I think reviewers sometimes forget is that when you attack a book that someone else loves, you are attacking that person's taste. So, yes, you have every right to speak your mind, but you shouldn't be shocked and angry that not everyone agrees -- and dares to argue with you.
If I say only a moron would think Hot Head was a good book, am I not insulting everyone who loved Hot Head? Is it really unthinkable that the people who loved Hot Head would argue with me?
I know that online reviewing -- like the rest of online publishing -- is in its infancy, but we all have to behave like...well, I don't know about "professionals," because some people make a point of the fact that they *aren't* professionals, that they are simply reviewing out of love, but surely we have to at least behave sensibly? And expect as much from ourselves as we require of others?
Josh wrote: "Johanna wrote: "Thank you, Antonella. That is very kind of you. :) And I agree with you that it takes time to write a review - that's why I can't do it as often as I would like to. And that's why I..."Amen, Josh! I think the key is never to make it personal whether you write or read a review.
Exception can & should be made to reviewing books that promote ignorance & bigotry. I don't think anyone would object to people condemning Mein Kampf.
Josh wrote: "Johanna wrote: "Thank you, Antonella. That is very kind of you. :) And I agree with you that it takes time to write a review - that's why I can't do it as often as I would like to. And that's why I..."That sounds like an illogical reaction. I guess if you write a negative review, you do it with a mind that the author should have to live with it. But the same must apply to the reviewer, you must live with the fact that someone doesn't like what you write, but gives a negative review of the review so to speak. In other words, what you expect other to take when you dish it out, you must accept as well.
It may have something to do with how the critic is presented of course, it is very easy to be rude and unprofessional, or even offending, in the anonymity of the Internet.
Josh wrote: "And what I think reviewers sometimes forget is that when you attack a book that someone else loves, you are attacking that person's taste. So, yes, you have every right to speak your mind, but you shouldn't be shocked and angry that not everyone agrees -- and dares to argue with you."If I state in quite an objective way why I didn't like a book, with no personal attacks on the writer, I have the right not to be bothered by a *pack* of supporters of the book.
Antonella wrote: "Josh wrote: "And what I think reviewers sometimes forget is that when you attack a book that someone else loves, you are attacking that person's taste. So, yes, you have every right to speak your m..."But you might have to accept that someone else states in an objective way that they disagree with you?
Mod
Of course. That's never pleasant. But this whole internet world is so different, isn't it?
I mean, when I was a wee inkspot, I'd never have dreamed of contacting a reviewer for any reason. Period. Times have changed.
Reviewers would be the first to say they have a right to be as snarky and rude as they wish in a review -- and I agree with this -- but at the same time you can't insist that there be no rules and no standards for how you operate, but that rules and standards do exist for others on the web.
Or rather, you can insist on this all you like, but it's a losing battle.
Mod
And I think given the way so much of web interaction is going, the environment for all writers is going to be much more hostile before it gets better.
Or do you guys not feel that?
I certainly don't want to think of myself as a "real" writer, if I was I'd give myself a REALLY bad review :) I try to think of it as relaying information to other readers and unless it's positive information, I'm going to be pretty succinct about it. I have reviewed one 1-star book (out of 7 or 8) and while I really disliked this book, it didn't make me angry like most that are 1 star. The others I won't review because I don't believe in spewing bile, it tends to splash (for a disgusting analogy). I tag/shelve the books with the broad reasons they stink (to me) and leave it at that.
But if I did say something really nasty, I'd sure expect to get nasty back, just not from the author. Not because he or she SHOULDN'T, but because it makes them look bad to the people that DO like their books. I've lost some respect for authors I like for engaging with bad reviews, it just seems petty I guess.
ETA: Just looked and realized that my one bad written review was actually 2-stars, I guess because the idea was pretty good. I try to be generous :)
But if I did say something really nasty, I'd sure expect to get nasty back, just not from the author. Not because he or she SHOULDN'T, but because it makes them look bad to the people that DO like their books. I've lost some respect for authors I like for engaging with bad reviews, it just seems petty I guess.
ETA: Just looked and realized that my one bad written review was actually 2-stars, I guess because the idea was pretty good. I try to be generous :)
Mod
..."
I think this new reviewer/author dynamic is difficult for all of us -- and we're all suffering the growing pains of this new interactive reviewing/blogging relationship.
And in some ways I think reviewers are suffering the most. Because they aren't trained and aren't paid. They have to learn as they go along. So sometimes they're an author's BFF (when the writer is trying to get them to review or they've given a glowing review) and sometimes they are the author's blackest foe.
And the author is equally bewildered. Sometimes you're a columnist or an interviewee or a feted guest. And sometimes you're getting a scathing review from someone you thought of as a "friend."
It's a learning curve for all of us. A lot of feelings have been hurt on both sides. A lot of people feeling used or unappreciated. And there continues to be fales expectations and massive confusion all around.
I don't see it getting better before it gets worse.
Mod
I know. I sympathize. I think a lot of reviewers would prefer not to think of themselves as "real" writers. Just someone who loves books and sharing what they enjoy or don't enjoy. But posting on the web = publishing and that changes everything for everyone.
Not least because so many authors are so desperate for a review of any kind that they approach every blogger and Goodreads reader they can lay their hands on. I think authors are probably the driving force in changing the dynamic? But regardless of what changed it, it is changed forever.
Mod
..."
It's exhausting. Every week there's some blow up. And every other week the blow up is between authors and reviewers. How can it still be a surprise to anyone that we're all touchy and over-sensitive about both our opinions and our work?
Nobody likes criticism. Authors don't like it. Reviewers don't like it. But we're all going to get it every single time we open our mouths.
I guess eventually we'll get to a point where we're all numb to it. Hopefully.
Mod
..."
I agree. At the same time, I don't believe Mein Kampf should be banned. I think it should be openly discussed and debated. Otherwise it takes on a mystical power and significance. Dragging monsters out of the dark and into the daylight is the best way to kill them.
But as far as discussion... maybe this is part of what we're running into with reviews also. So much of reviewing takes place in what at least "appears" to be a discussion format, that it does invite differing opinions in a way a review in Mystery Scene does not.
But it's not really geared to open discussion, I suspect. Meaning, it's likely that a challenge to the reviewer's opinion is probably going to look like an attack from the reviewer's standpoint, even if the challenge is courteous.
Or maybe that's not fair. Maybe that's an incorrect assumption.
I have found my GR experience fascinating. It is made up of people from all over the world. People of different cultures, socioeconomic backgrounds , life experiences, ages, family structures and different gender outlook/presentation. In fact the only similarities are based on a passion and love for books. Some people are passionate because their house payment depends upon books, and some are passionate because they feel their sanity is truly dependent upon books. Then of course there is the vast in-between. There is no real common language. English words, perhaps, but no common cultural language. No common etiquette template. Some people here are major introverts. They don't have a lot of experience with social situations and this is their major area of social interaction. Then, there are the extroverts (at least in written communication/debate). The people that LOVE to debate PASSIONATELY (including having the last word). And of course, there is again the vast range of in-betweeners.
This is a fascinating social dynamic. Hopefully, people will want to preserve it enough to dial back and give everyone more emotional room to be themselves. A pluralistic society is wonderful, but it does have challenges. I am very thankful for the opportunity to have these kind of challenges. =D
Mod
And the saddest thing of it all is that deep down we all love the same things: words and stories. Shouldn't that be something that unites us?
I have been taking a m/m break lately. I have been reading non-fiction. My new hobby is organizing my cookbooks and recipe collections. I found some well done, reasonably priced software out there for this!!Josh, have you looked into what's available to catalog you library? They have software with scanners and everything!! Super cool stuff! That way if you have to store stuff (like I do) you'll know box to pull. =D
Anyway, I am reading
right now. It's WWII gay fiction, very good book. It has lots of history deets, I'm not familiar with, but it is an absorbing read. It's worth a look!
Mod
Oh yes! I want that book.
And the cataloging software sounds like a good idea too. :-D
Mod
Well, it does unite a lot of us. I think we've managed to create a mostly civil discussion forum here. You guys challenge me when you think (FOOLISHLY, INCORRECTLY!!!) that I'm mistaken. I challenge you WHEN YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY SO WRONG. We discuss lots of books and so far so good.
But of course this is my author forum and that changes the dynamic. Although it's really hard to picture any of you ranting and railing like some of the people I see in other forums.
Granted, we're all passionate about books or we wouldn't be here. But you know you're in trouble when a call for civility is deemed "bullying" as I've seen in more than one discussion lately. *Splutter.*
Mod
Very true.
And there are many things I like about Goodreads. Some of you are only on Goodreads and this is our only place to interact, so I'm not planning to scuttle GR. But for whatever reason GR does seem to have more than its share of uproars.
Poking my head out of the corner ;) It's all just human nature, what one people deems acceptable behaviour, another person does not. I for one can't write reviews for books I dislike, because I know just because it is not my taste it does not make it a bad book and someone else may love it. As for what am I reading, I have discovered some of Harper Fox's stories. Really enjoying them.
Mod
You are absolutely
Mod
I haven't read anything from her, but she sounds promising. I added Life After Joe into my to-read list. :)
Let's see... I haven't decided which book to read next, but I'm choosing between Magic Mansion, Frat Boy and Toppy and The Elegant Corpse. And oh! Just remembered that I haven't read the Book of the Month yet... Oops!
Johanna wrote: "Josh wrote: "Well, it does unite a lot of us. I think we've managed to create a mostly civil discussion forum here. You guys challenge me when you think (FOOLISHLY, INCORRECTLY!!!) that I'm mistake..."LOL Johanna. So
Johanna wrote: "Manda wrote: "As for what am I reading, I have discovered some of Harper Fox's stories. Really enjoying them."I haven't read anything from her, but she sounds promising. I added Life After Joe in..."
If you haven't read Scrap Metalyet, you absolutely have something very good to look forward to :). Lucky you!
Mod
I haven't read anything from her, but she sounds promising. I added..."
Hmmmm... I actually didn't realize that the Book of the Month is a Harper Fox book, too. Double "Oops!"... So I'm off to read that one then. :)
There are many points each of you stated that resonated with me. I try to be as polite as possible and I don't always manage, but I try, because I honestly respect everybody's opinion, even when I don't agree, because I know I MIGHT be wrong - I tend to be impressed by books or situations, so the blinding moments make me lose what's in the background sometimes. That said... honestly, the book I like are like ... babies? no, I didn't create them, so... very beloved pets, like my impossible-to-forget cat Pepe. I cherish them, I nurture them in my heart, I hurt when someone criticize them, I'd like to find a rational attitude, I can't. When there's a book I didn't like, but I know is loved, I try to find something positive to say about it anyway because, I mean, it's like saying to a mom that their kids are ugly.
Is this dishonest, insincere? I know that when I'm angry and frustrated my tongue (or my fingers) can cut like a knife, but that has never given me any satisfaction.
Mod
You know what, there would be no civilization if we didn't all censor ourselves and our behavior to some extent.
The bottom line is, in real life we don't get to scream at people and berate them because they annoy us. We don't get to tell our coworkers exactly how stupid and inefficient they are. Even when you're the boss you have to temper your honesty. We don't get to rail at wait staff because they forgot our request for a doughnut. We don't get to walk up to strangers and tell them they're ugly and we hate their voice even though we've only had to listen to them for the last five minutes.
And the people who do give into these infantile impulses are regarded by the rest of us as...troubled.
But the anonymity of the internet allows some people the freedom to spew their frustrations in a way they aren't allowed to in real life.
You could argue that being able to act like sociopaths on the web keeps those people sane in their real lives, but I think it probably eventually leads them to think they can get away with that kind of behavior in real life.
Where they generally get a rude awakening.
That doesn't mean you can't be critical -- highly critical, in fact. It merely means, censorship is a fact of adult interactions.
This is such an interesting discussion. Almost all of the people I have interacted with on GR are incredibly kind and supportive. They love books and appreciate authors. When I encounter mean-spirited reviews (I don't mean thoughtful, but negative reviews), it makes me feel protective of the author, even if I have never heard of the person before. I have even bought the book, just because I felt outrage.
In between the fiction, I try to read a little non-fiction if I find something that interests me. Currently I am working my way through Thinking, Fast and Slow. It is hard work so I can only do a couple of chapters at a time, but also very interesting. It actually explains why we always do absolutely anything else than the task we have set us, surfing the internet or raiding the fridge in stead of working (ring a bell anyone?), it seems the brain actually is very lazy...After someone (Candice?) recommended Alex Beecroft I have also started "The witch's apprentice" which I really like but is nothing like how I thought it should be. It is nice to be surprised :)
Alby Krebs wrote: "This is such an interesting discussion. Almost all of the people I have interacted with on GR are incredibly kind and supportive. They love books and appreciate authors. When I encounter mean-spiri..."Discussions are good, disagreement may even lead to learning something new, but some people, not only here but everywhere on the net, forget all they ever learned about politeness and courtesy when hiding behind a nickname and sittting safely at home and share their thoughts and ideas with the world. It is scary sometimes how some people behave. And they would probably never dare doing it if you met them in person.
I am not sure this will get better, and perhaps the best thing is to ignore them and let them sit there and rant to themselves. And the rest can have insightful, funny and courteous disagreements and discussions.
If you don't agree with this, I will forever haunt you on the internet describing in detail how stupid and ugly you are, so best beware!
Josh wrote: "But the anonymity of the internet allows some people the freedom to spew their frustrations in a way they aren't allowed to in real life...."I guess I have not seen this behavior myself. I have seen hysterics, belligerent language, condescension and definite disrespect, but I haven't seen anything on the web that I haven't seen in real life.
Here on the web it gets MAGNIFIED by group hysteria and a ripple affect on the lives it touches. The wave can grow and feed on itself. If people would just choose to NOT get involved it would be better, but this is everyone's space. A place that everyone is a part of, like a family room. People are protective of their family room. Some find this a place of "belonging" and having the freedom to speak up is an important part of that, just like at a family meeting.
As people don't respond to commenters who are too aggressive, they eventually go somewhere else. This is not the only way to handle rudeness,of course, just one arm of a multi-tiered approach, along with example, moderators, education.....
I have heard about some nasty incidences but I haven't seen much of it myself.
Stopping a tidal wave has not been invented ,so I believe it has happened!
Mod
Sure! It works both ways. When a reviewer seems unfairly attacked, her friends and fans move to support her too.
This is normal. We are loyal. We like things to be fair.
But it's not a fair world. All books are not created equal. Nor are all reviews. And we are all a little emotional when it comes to our work and our friends -- which makes it hard for us to see things objectively.
Authors should not respond to reviewers. Period. They should not rally their friends and supporters. They should not...play to the peanut gallery.
But the same -- in my opinion -- holds true for reviewers. They should not respond to a hysterical author by rallying their friends and supporters and threatening authors with blacklists and so on.
I know it's difficult because many reviewers don't want to see themselves as professionals or be saddled with some heavy responsibility for sharing their casual thoughts on books. But I think the internet has changed everything -- and I think that, whether right or wrong, there is no going back.
The review process is changing every bit as much as the rest of publishing.
Mod
So why DO we do everything else first?
Mod
..."
I'm beginning to think the internet may promote a kind of mob mentality. You see this very often in the hundreds of comments on a Big Issue post -- and it's very clear most people are not reading the previous comments. There will be dramatic calls for usually non-specific action and lots of revelations of personal experiences, and a few like-minded people patting each other on the back for their insightful observations.
Part of it is these things instantly turn into forums for self-promotion (authors, in particular, are guilty of this).
And the other part is we humans do love drama.
Mod
..."
God yes.
And you know the truth is, the participants are usually authors, reviewers, bloggers. Many many more readers are bemusedly watching these things unfold without comment, but you know they think we're all nuts!
And they're largely right. :-)
Josh wrote: "Anne wrote: "In between the fiction, I try to read a little non-fiction if I find something that interests me. Currently I am working my way through Thinking, Fast and Slow. It is hard work so I ca..."Hmm, I am not sure I am able to give a good short answer to that, but how I understand it, is that our brain mainly works two ways, fast thinking which is intuitive and easy and how we orient ourselves without much concious thought, and slow thinking where we analyse, plan and so on. We tend to try to avoid slow thinking because it feels uncomfortable, so when we work with something that needs slow thinking, it feels hard and so we try to slip away as much as we can. The slow thinking part of the brain is lazy, the brain always try to do what creates the least resistance.
Or something like that. It is a book of app 500 pages, so this has to be the short and dirty version. But I got a kind of lightbulb experience when I read that chapter :)
Mod
..."
That makes perfect sense to me!
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
Q&A with Josh Lanyon
Books mentioned in this topic
Chained Melody (other topics)The Far Pavilions (other topics)
Death in Kashmir (other topics)
The Flame Trees of Thika: Memories of an African Childhood (other topics)
Mistress of the Art of Death (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
M.M. Kaye (other topics)Elspeth Huxley (other topics)
Lauren Willig (other topics)
Charlie Cochet (other topics)
Damon Suede (other topics)
More...
I was thinking about this and remembered that one of my favorite pictures ever is one of my one time roommate and I at my birthday party. To me it's a picture of two people that love each other very much - he's kissing my forehead and my eyes are closed and I look extremely blissed out with my head on his shoulder. You'd think we were in love, but alas, we were not, he's gay and his boyfriend took the picture. And no, I wasn't secretly in love with him or hoping for a SFY ending :) Though the fact that we were opposite sex probably made that affection between friends more comfortable, it's still just a picture of friends.
So... ya never really know, I guess.