The Extra Cool Group! (of people Michael is experimenting on) discussion
Pertaining to the project
>
The Dysfunctional Relationship Between GR and Authors (at least in YA)
I don't feel like I owe authors anything - I did, after all, spend time and money on their book; I'm not obligated to then say something nice about it if I hated it. Goodreads is a community of readers, and I do feel obligated to other readers to say what I really think. If I try to spin a bad book in a positive light, because I know the author worked really hard on it or whatever, I feel like I'm betraying my fellow readers - who then, if they trust my opinion, might go out and waste their time and money on this terrible book.I think that's a very valid point. I read books to be entertained, so if I'm not entertained, then paying to be 'not entertained' means I've been contractually cheated. People's honest reviews of books will influence whether I'll read a book. What I value about GR (amongst other stuff) is when a friend criticises a book, it didn't entertain him/her, and lets me know about it, because that person understands my taste in books, and thinks I will enjoy it, even though they didn't. That's happened a few times and I value both the recommend and the honest (harsh) review.
*splutters**coughs**chokes**dies*What about the books you recommend to me and then wait until I'm about to read before you tell me that I won't like them?!
*Shakes fist at GN*
Though that did turn out to be pretty funny!
Exactly! Your 'hate' is just so much better/funnier/more attractive than mine!
Being acquainted with the author hinders my ability to be objective and honest, so if I ever do read any books by Goodreaders, I'd be uncomfortable reviewing them beyond giving them a star rating. Ironically, I'd probably prefer to give a review but no star rating to someone I know--at least then you can explain the bias and relationship!
i think that authors hyping their material on GR is annoying but understandable. i usually check myself before rolling my eyes because hey, they're just artists who are trying to get the word out about their efforts, what's the harm.reviews that i've gotten the most pissed off about are those rare-ish reviews that make personal attacks on the actual life of the author. as far as i'm concerned, go hog wild in critiquing style, theme, narrative, whatever. but attacking real components of a person's life just comes across as so dense and so despicable to me. critique the product, please.
i guess the exception to that would be personal narratives, books of opinion, bios. in that case, i have no prob with critiques that are critical with the real life activities and points of view that are being described. i've made some myself. if so-and-so is going to be writing all about their life, then i suppose that opinionating on that life is a valid part of a critique and not just miserable bitchiness. or so i tell myself.
Mod
But, in every argument between an author and a reviewer I've come across, I've sided with the reviewer. If you don't want to hear that your book is a lame rip-off of Twilight, then don't write a lame rip-off of Twilight.
The only interesting author comment I've ever had on a review was for the author to laughingly inform me that he was not a she as my review seemed to imply.
Mod
I'm on my IPhone so I can't link but it was J.F. Lewis on my review of his book Staked.
Hee, Kat, that was classic!My favorite author interaction here was with the author of The Unincorporated Man. He was nothing but cordial and funny, despite the terrible review I gave his book.
The only honest review of one well-known YA author by another I ever came across is this onehttp://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...
and I have to say, I admire this woman, because like you all said, there is an overall practice that everyone only says nice things about each other's books.
But I also agree that these authors overestimate their influence on us. I will first listen to my friends' book suggestions than my fave author's. They can blurb each other all they want, I do a thorough research before I read anything.
As for authors joining discussions of their own books, it's almost always uncomfortable and I do not appreciate that I am being watched.
i loooove it when authors come on my threads.um.
As an author who has reviewed the works of other authors who I know, I'll say this: I only leave reviews for books that I enjoyed. Unless I truly loved the book, I usually try to balance those reviews with things that I maybe didn't necessarily care for, but I won't trash another author's book. I want to help and promote authors who I truly believe wrote a kick ass book that will appeal to others. But if I didn't like it, I won't review it. Basically, you don't shit where you eat. And my personal rule is that I'll only review a book I spent my own money on. Blurbs are another thing.But I can definitely see how this causes discomfort. And authors definitely should have thick skin, but the unfortunate fact of life is that many (most?) don't. If they can't handle the bad reviews, they should stop trying to publish their work for mass consumption. Simple as that.
is it okay if i give dostoevsky a bad review?
Tamora Peirce gives lower stars. But I doubt she's in the position to worry about butt or back scratching. I will rub Rasputin's beard and love all Russians, just in case.
Mod
there was only 1 dostoevsky i didn't like. out of four.so if i badmouth his one book, he will never ever know.
As an author who has reviewed the works of other authors who I know, I'll say this: I only leave reviews for books that I enjoyed.But isn't the who I know bit kind of key there? I wouldn't write a negative review of a friend; if the book sucked I would just pretend to have not read it. That doesn't mean that you can't write negative reviews of anything. Does it?
Steve wrote: "As an author who has reviewed the works of other authors who I know, I'll say this: I only leave reviews for books that I enjoyed. Unless I truly loved the book, I usually try to balance those revi..."Is this why you haven't written a review for my book yet ;)
On a less narcissistic note, I like to critique a work, but always try to convey my sentiments as kindly as possible, and generally acknowledge that my issues with books are generally a matter of personal preference, as most critiques are. While there seems to be a general consensus on what constitutes "good" writing, I feel that trashing someone else's work serves little purpose, and those who don't meet the general criteria established by (who is it again?), perhaps it is better to focus on what can be improved rather than try to quantify their lack of tact and ability as authors.
I guess it would be inappropriate for me to use this space to plug Davidian & Giltinan's riveting classic "Nonlinear Models for Repeated Measurement Data" as an excellent stocking-stuffer for the Young Adult in your life with a burning passion for statistical methodology.(joke)
Yes. I gave our book a 5-star rating. So sue me.
Maybe I should go to bed now.
Miriam wrote: "As an author who has reviewed the works of other authors who I know, I'll say this: I only leave reviews for books that I enjoyed.But isn't the who I know bit kind of key there? I wouldn't write ..."
If I feel I must write a negative review, I will. But I'm more likely to give it a poor rating and just move on. Richard Matheson's "Hell House" for example. I hated that book. I had a scathing review planned for it, began to write it, then realized I had more important things to do that day and stopped. Instead, I wrote a couple sentences and got on with my life. But that doesn't mean I won't leave a negative review in the future. I'll use the same method as I mentioned above - I'll try to list both what I liked and disliked in equal proportion. Fortunately, I have yet to read a book that has so offended my sensibilities that I feel compelled to rip it apart.
Kirk - I'm only on chapter 2, but picked it back up last night. I got caught up in Ship Breaker, which was a library book, so I wanted to finish it first.
I usually don't finish books that I hate/dislike. And I don't review/rate books that I don't finish. Thus, you will rarely see a book on my GR shelves that is rated less than 3 (though there are exceptions).
I had one author who flipped out and went crazy about one review I wrote, and even got his mates to join GR and get involved. I lost any shreds of respect remaining for him having read his book because of that.
Mod
I like being able to befriend the writers of my favorite books (and my not so favorite books). I like being able to get into a dialogue about their book and ask questions. I also like to read their blog so I know when they've written the next book and when it will be published. I have seen how authors use this website to advertise, but it doesn't bother me. I just ignore what I'm not interested in.
Kat wrote: "The only interesting author comment I've ever had on a review was for the author to laughingly inform me that he was not a she as my review seemed to imply."I wrote Andrew Davidson about his book "The Gargoyle". It was one of the best books I've read in a long time. I told him that I really liked the book and I thought he could probably write about a pimple on a fleas butt and make it a mesmerizing read.
He wrote back,
'Thanks so much. My next book is actually called "Pimple on a Flea's Butt." Weird coincidence. '
So I wrote back and told me that I wanted a signed copy!
Hey, I dissed Dickens the other day. The guy got paid by the word and it shows...karen wrote: "is it okay if i give dostoevsky a bad review?"
Mod
And, experienced authors will also see it this way. There's definitely a little bit of politics involved, though, when you have friends who are both on goodreads and have written books. I don't know what I'll do the first time I read a 2-star book by a goodreads friend, and I don't know if I'll be tempted to water down my opinions. Have you reviewed books by any "friends?"
I have to post this. It just covers this particular discussion perfectly. As might be suspected, it's from Ceridwen.
As an author who has reviewed the works of other authors who I know, I'll say this: I only leave reviews for books that I enjoyed. Unless I truly loved the book, I usually try to balance those reviews with things that I maybe didn't necessarily care for, but I won't trash another author's book. I want to help and promote authors who I truly believe wrote a kick ass book that will appeal to others.These are the most-commonly stated sentiments I've read of other authors, but it seems to be a misappropriation of reviewing circles/practices. Is the purpose of a review marketing? Do authors have the obligation to promote (as in market) the works of all other writers--or, more, to never stand between a sale and another writer? Do negative reviews really even stop people from buying books? (I know they don't for me; I use 1 and 2 star reviews to vet book purchases, as they're usually more detailed than positive reviews. I've also picked up a great many books thanks to negative reviews. Never would have read Twilight if it weren't for Cleolinda, fr'instance).
There are two things I find troubling about the practice of giving only and all positive, high-star reviews: first, that it seems bundled up with the idea that negative reviews are "trashing" authors or their work--Steve, you're not the first author I've heard express that sentiment, but the idea that negative reactions to art automatically equals shit talk, essentially, worries me as it seems fundamentally unrealistic. Also, I've heard readers say again and again that they don't trust reviewers who only review positively. And I can see why. If the only things you're willing to say publicly are nice things, it suggests that your public relationship to books is candy coated, somehow divorced from the way that real people interact with books. I don't think it takes even a particularly savvy reader to recognize when marketing rather than honest reacting is going on.
Good points, Phoebe. An honest negative review is not going to hurt the author. If anything, it will help the author write better next time. Even if (or maybe especially if) the review is coming from another writer that he/she respects. Reviewing should not be mistaken for marketing. At least I hope they are different.
Phoebe wrote: "As an author who has reviewed the works of other authors who I know, I'll say this: I only leave reviews for books that I enjoyed. Unless I truly loved the book, I usually try to balance those revi..."All good points, and again, I'll just talk from personal experience because I don't want to speak for anyone else. It's a fine line, to be sure. I don't want to go out of my way to trash a book because, for one I don't really feel like trashing something is necessary unless it really, really deserves it, and unless that's true, then it will have some redeeming value. If a good review is described in the same amount of detail as a bad one, I feel like just as much value or insight can be gleaned from it.
Here is an example of a review http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/... I almost didn't post because I didn't know the author yet but would eventually meet him, and had no idea what his reaction would be once we inevitably met, if anything at all. Sometimes you just never know how people are going to react and you don't want to go burning bridges with anyone, but at the same time, you want to be completely honest. And if I can't be completely honest without saying "I hated this book with the white hot passion of a thousand suns" then I don't feel it's worth it to post the review. Yes, I will avoid posting something that I fear will hurt another writer's feelings, book sales, or possibly cause a conflict.
And yes, this is a different standard than casual readers and reviewers will bring to their reviews. But it's how I choose to do it, as a fellow writer. I will try to write a balanced, honest, fair review, hopefully with some entertainment value for the reader so that it's not just the same old thing. My reviews are evolving as I do more of them and, like any writing, I'm sure I'll continue to refine the way I do them, but I won't trash someone's work. But I will be honest and try to write a review that's not completely sunshine and unicorns because people can see through that and, as mentioned before, doesn't really help. People don't want to read BS, they want to read honesty, and that's my personal philosophy. Me and Abe.
Eh?Eh! wrote: "Hmmm. I believe in niceness but not at the cost of the truth. Neither one should have to be sacrificed for the other...it's like the admonition to "be nice" mutated and killed the value of the ho..."i believe in "giving people their due." if i hated something, i wont dance around it.
luckily, there are only a couple books i have truly hated. one was about cake, the other about sock monkeys. i made it very clear why and how so that anyone stumbling across those books might find a dissenting view point that was not polishing the knobs of the authors.
i try to keep it real, yo.
I have to admit, I will be nicer in my review if the author is right there reading it. I think that we can be nice and honest at the same time, kind of like "constructive criticism." Wouldn't an author want honest input that would help them write better? It doesn't mean that we have to be so frank as to be rude, but figure out a way that could help with writing in the future, at least my personal impression of it. So, yes, it does affect my review if an author approached me to write it, or if an author is in that forum reading my review.I will allow my sarcasm and sometimes not so nice wit to show through when I'm reviewing an established author who is too busy to read a nobody's review, like mine.
Aloha wrote: "I have to admit, I will be nicer in my review if the author is right there reading it. I think that we can be nice and honest at the same time, kind of like "constructive criticism." Wouldn't an ..."Well put . . . cheers!
Aloha wrote: "I have to admit, I will be nicer in my review if the author is right there reading it. I think that we can be nice and honest at the same time, kind of like "constructive criticism." Wouldn't an ..."i agree, and usually, i try to keep it on an up beat.
i do have to admit a single instance where i was just an utter asshole...
rude seeped from my pores.
When I first entered the on-line community with authors, one PNR author unfortunately got my inexperienced helpfulness. I picked apart her book publicly, thinking I was being helpful. I've since learned to be tactful about "constructive criticism."
I prefer to be honest, even at the price of the occasional shouting match.
she immediately "un-friended" me and has since banned me from reading and reviewing any of her future books for the blogThis is a disturbing trend I've noticed that I like to call ABB (authors behaving badly.) Not only do you see this childish sort of behavior, I've seen authors do pit bull attacks on readers who gave them a bad review. And I mean personal attacks - intellect, education, even calling into question whether the person had downloaded from a pirate site.
GAH! Folks, when you are published, you have handed over your work. It is now public, and anyone, short of slandering the author on a personal level, may say whatever they like about the work.
I'm a voracious reader as well as a writer. When I give reviews, they are honest, heartfelt and MY opinion. While I try to be constructive and non-snarky, I don't like everything I read. And not everyone will agree with me. That's the beauty of fiction, that everyone will perceive it in a different way.
Lisa, can they do that? I mean, on a legal level can she really ban you from reading and reviewing with the intent of publishing a review?What horrible behaviour!
On the GR official author blog, some authors make it plain that its a waste of time being part of the community, they just want to market their books. I suppose GR is somewhat conflicted about it as part of their business is authors advertising on the site, giving away books etc. So I think part of the problem is that its impossible to satisfy both what authors want and what readers want.With a couple of exceptions I deleted all the author-friends I had, partly because I was fed up of being one of their 900+ marketing list, hardly any kind of friends, but also because I got a lot of invites from other authors. The exceptions are authors who are also participants as readers and review books.
Too many posts to read yet I must put in my two cents.I have no problem with authors marketing. I can only imagine the difficulty in being initially published and convincing people to read your book. I also have no problem with an author rating their own work 5 stars. If someone does not consider their own book to be 5 stars, then I will probably not read it.
Now, I have accepted friendships from authors who eventually annoyed me enough to delete their friendship, same as with regular non author members.
What I am most grateful for since joining Goodreads is that I have read many amazing books from small press/independant publishers, books I would probably never have heard of if I did not fall "victim" to an author pushing their own work. But one push is usually enough so repetition will not earn browny points with me.
Lisa wrote: "Hi Angel! :waves:...
I would think that an unfavorable review would, for an author, be somewhat like someone insulting one of my kids. ;-)"
Hi Lisa!
I will tell you that bad reviews hurt on a personal level. Dear gods, we're human. If you prick an author, do we not bleed? (sorry, Mr. S, couldn't resist.) The last bad one I received was so vitriolic and caustic that it felt like little surgical knives being drawn across my innards.
But I thanked the reviewer for taking the time - it must have taken time and effort to write such a thorough review - and moved on. We can't agree with everything out there, but I will defend to the death your right to your opinion.
Angel wrote: "The last bad one I received was so vitriolic and caustic that it felt like little surgical knives being drawn across my innards..."Hi Angel,
Was that the 2-star review for Diego? I didn't read that one because it contained spoilers. No matter, it's now on my Kindle that I got as an early Christmas present. :)
Angel wrote: Folks, when you are published, you have handed over your work. It is now public, and anyone, short of slandering the author on a personal level, may say whatever they like about the work.I agree. Am I happy that a colleague assigned my second book in her Fiction class? (yes!) and that she then required her students to write reviews of it on Amazon? (not really) But what the hell. It's public now.
(So if you check out my book, 'Not a Chance', on amazon and see all those reviews out of Chicago--some very positive, some rather negative--you know why).
Jessica wrote: "(So if you check out my book, 'Not a Chance', on amazon and see all those reviews out of Chicago--some very positive, some rather negative--you know why)..."I saw just two Chicago reviewers and only one was negative. Did I miss something? The book sounds great!
Well I think there are about 8 Chicago reviews out of the 12 that are there or something like that...you know the negative reviews always weigh more in one's mind than the others (they sting!). But as they say, any publicity is good...thanks, Nancy!
The Extra Cool Group! (of people Michael is...
Books mentioned in this topic
Diego (other topics)The Unincorporated Man (other topics)
Delirium (other topics)
Wings (other topics)
Constructive criticism is great, but that's not what I do here at GoodReads. Here, I don't really care about an author's intent or goals or fragile feelings. I'm here to talk about my experiences with books, and those are personal, one-sided, and honest. I figure, by the time a book is actually published, it should have been read by many people, including editors, who are the proper providers of con-crit. As a reader of the finished product, that's not my role.
I don't feel like I owe authors anything - I did, after all, spend time and money on their book; I'm not obligated to then say something nice about it if I hated it. Goodreads is a community of readers, and I do feel obligated to other readers to say what I really think. If I try to spin a bad book in a positive light, because I know the author worked really hard on it or whatever, I feel like I'm betraying my fellow readers - who then, if they trust my opinion, might go out and waste their time and money on this terrible book.
I do try to be fair - if I hate something for an irrational or personal reason, I'll say so. If I'm just in a bad mood when I read it, I'll say so. But if I think a book sucks, I'm not going to sugarcoat it either.
Being acquainted with the author hinders my ability to be objective and honest, so if I ever do read any books by Goodreaders, I'd be uncomfortable reviewing them beyond giving them a star rating.