Vaginal Fantasy Book Club discussion
Tangents/Off-Topic Discussions
>
Does an author's public or online image affect your decision to buy/read their work?
date
newest »
newest »
Well, given people used to wear tshirts/buttons declaring "I survived an elevator ride with Harlan Ellison", being acerbic didn't really hurt his career.Personally, I don't expect to like authors/filmmakers. As long as their work rocks, that's all that matters.
The whole "He's such a nice, normal guy" impression may help public reputations, but the fact is, people will still flock to read/see celebs, rgardless of their attitudes.
And then there's Mel Gibson.
Let me spend a few minutes listening to the dull echo within my shallow self (or "inner voice" to put a positive spin on it).Yes. I think the two consequences for me would be that it's harder to enjoy the work and that I'd have some difficulty to justify throwing money at him. Of course it works the other way round as well.
In general it also depeends on how much info you have. What is the background? If I saw Wil Wheaton actively keeping his distance from fans, I wouldn't be influenced by it. But that might also have to do with being aware of certain incidents and having the impression that he just isn't comfortable with strangers getting close and invading his private space. It's something I can understand and respect. Not everybody can be an eager arm rubber (looking at nobody in particular *cough*).
Though based on your description, it would be a little harder to understand why an author would do something like the above (other than being unable to take criticism, in which case it would be better to just stay away from certain websites).
I guess sometimes ignorance really is bliss and the Internet might just tell us more than we really want.
It's slightly different with movies, because there are so many people involved that influence the result. Writer, director, actors, effects guys and the hundreds of people nobody is really aware of.
Still, I doubt I could make myself watch any of Mel Gibson's vanity projects.
Orson Scott Card is the only author I can think of right now that I actually decided not to read their books because of their political/social views. But I can think of several authors that I have actively pursued after I've read their blogs and interviews, or (rarely) had the pleasure of meeting in person. Ilona Andrews, Molly Harper, Kevin Hearne, Gail Carriger, Nicole Peeler and Jim Hines are just a few off the top of my head.I really don't like to support people or institutions that I strongly disagree with. They have a right to their opinion and I have a right to not give them my money. Usually my focus is more "I really like this person I want to give them my money" rather than the other way around.
Orson Scott Card is the only one I can think of off the top of my head as well. But it would definitely affect my decision. I know if I see how a business owner responds to reviews on Yelp or the like, and it's poorly or just plain rude, I will choose not to go to their business. I think then I'm thinking about the people that are their employees and much love is not in this business apparently.
Sadly it does affect the way that I view the work of the person. Michael Jackson was the first that I experienced it with, then Orson Scott Card and well a host of actors. Sometimes it is hard to move beyond the person's idiocy and lose yourself in their art. Plus who wants to support them anyway.
I think that I would be hesitant to buy a book based on the author's character if they were making it public knowledge. If I read something of "yours" and I don't enjoy it I would want my opinion respected as I would want any other reader's opinion respected even if it went against my own. In a profession where your income is based on other people purchasing your item you have to suck it up and understand that not everyone is going to think you are the greatest, get some tougher skin, or get a job doing something where you get paid no matter if people like you or not.
As much as I love certain authors if I found out that the author was a homophobe or a racist or a just flat out a jerk toward humanity I wouldn't support them. There are thousands of other authors that I can support that aren't.
Well, I love Brandon Sanderson as an author partly because of the effort he makes to talk to his fans on facebook/twitter and how professional he is at getting books out on a timeline. Does that count?
Heh, how the wheel has turned. Not only does a writer have to be good at his/her craft, but they also have to stroke people's ego. So it's not about talent, as much as the ass kissing.
I don't want them to kiss my ass at all Sarge. But if someone is hostile to people who they've never even met online, what are they like in person? Like in my real life, I don't associate with angry and hostile people. I'll make my own choice not to purchase their books. But I will not lecture others about it.
And in the case of Orson Scott Card, as a gay woman, I take offense to his writing "Hypocrites of Homosexuality". Therefore, no more of his books will grace my shelves.
@Lindsay granted on Orson Scott Card (though it doesn't change my opinion of Ender's Game, any more than the fact that Jerry Lee Lewis married his underage cousin doesn't stop me from enjoying "Great Balls of Fire" and "Breathless") but the fact remains, many of history's greatest artists were not noted for being very fan friendly, or even friendly at all. Would you have seen Mark Twain swallowed up by time, unnoticed, just because he wasn't cuddly? Or Gerturde Stein? Groucho Marx? They're not obliged to the public for anything but their published works - beyond that, they're free to be themselves. And a lot of people, particularly creative ones, can be reclusive and irritable.That said, they should also have a thick skin in regards to criticism - you put your work out there, you need to be prepared for the shitstorm. The first 4 years of working in effects, we had dailies every morning, first thing. Dark stuffy screening room, filled with as many of your peers who could fit, as well as department heads, and the big boss. And your work would go up on the screen, looping over and over, while people with laser pointers looked for flaws - slipped matte? Glitchy frame? Shadow color off? We got fear of critique ground out of use, pretty quick.
As to "lectures"...this IS a discussion board, where we post opinions and are countered in them - it's the nature of discourse.
To clarify Sarge, I wasn't referring to you or anyone else on the board when I said the word "lecture". I appreciate everyone's opinions on here individually, because, as you said, it is a discussion board with opinions. That's why I'm here! :)
And yes, it is determined by everyone's individual beliefs and thoughts...I think the point the OP was mentioning was a particular author's responses to Amazon reviews. If you respond poorly, it reflects poorly upon you in the end. And you develop a reputation. I can think of a bakery here in Chicago that has bad press now due to their rude responses and sometimes threats to sue reviewers online. Stuff like that makes you just seem insecure, in my opinion. I forgot about Jerry Lee Lewis though! Crazy...
@Caitlin, I'd say that definitely counts, yes. @Sarge, Is it really about stroking people's ego though? Isn't it more a wish or need for mutual respect from the reader's side?
It's interesting to see the responses and some of the examples people have come up with.
I personally had not heard of or read anything by Orson Scott Card; being a gay woman my immediate response when I read the posts above was also one of 'hell no, I'll never be reading his work.'
At the same time I realize that does make me a hypocrite; when it comes to my work I want to be judged by the work I do, not by my sexuality, gender, political views or whatever else we can come up with. Yet when it comes to an author's work, I find myself ready to decide never to read their work because I disagree with some of their expressed views or actions.
Then again, I do kind of feel like it is part of being an author. Self-published or published by a company, an author is either faced with the option (when self-published) or the job (when 'forced' by a publisher) of maintaining a public persona that can and will be used as PR for their product, their books.
When you expose yourself to the public you know your words and actions can have both a positive and a negative impact on your sales.
I guess there's something to be said for both sides though, but I find myself unable to ignore my inner emotional response to certain situations. Wish I could say differently.
Patricia wrote: ...I like the public persona part and even think that pretty much everyone of public interest will in some way maintain that. Even subconsciously, as soon as you are aware that the cameras or the public is watching you, it is probably impossible to "just be yourself".
As a fan, it is probably best not to glimpse behind that too much (even though it is often just what you want). Artists are people. People have flaws. Most you won't care about, but what if... he/she films snuff torture porn with little puppies in the basement?
Of course, if even that public persona is already a xxx...
In most cases I can forget about someone being a member of Scientology for the duration of a movie. Watching anything with Tom Cruise however... challenging.
Not to mention I suddenly feel a certain regret to have bought the entire Ender collection for my Kindle. "Ignorance is bliss" all over again.
Having worked with enough "artists" and lived in some areas of the country where people have very, VERY different political views from mine, I've trained myself to remember that one negative aspect of a person's personality doesn't necessarily mean they're a terrible person and thereafter I should avoid all their work. I think Orson Scott Card may be one of my least favorite authors on a personal level, but Ender's Game remains one of my favorite books to this day. It's been a little while since I read it, but he doesn't expound on the homophobia (or any of the other things I disagree with him on) in the book, so I can take the story for what it is without necessarily associating it with him. As for giving him money - well, that's what the library is for. :)The same doesn't always apply to movies, at least for me. Unfortunately for actors, they (mostly) look the same whether on the screen or making personal statements on the street, so the visual makes it more difficult to reach that willing state of disbelief.
Neat question, Patricia. :)It doesn't affect me, most of the time. But I do have a line that can be crossed. It involves bullying.
An author/actor/musician/artist can be all sorts of crazy, but when they start bullying--like in the example you give--it turns me right off.
If that happens, I tend to just not bother with anything that the individual is involved in. At the very least, I don't spend money on it.
It works in the the other direction as well. My purchase of Nocturnal by Scott Sigler was based almost entirely on the strength of his Sword & Laser interview (found in episode 1 of the video series). His process, his views on writing, language and storytelling; it all struck me as intriguing and echoed some of my own thoughts. He also seemed quite grounded and genuine, which didn't hurt. So I bought a book I probably wouldn't have otherwise.
The way I look at it, this is a time of significant change. The old models are breaking down, new models are emerging, and this is affecting all entertainment media. In this period of transition, I personally consider it important to support people who're trying to innovate and grow in the new environment (in fact, that's part of the reason why I'm here), rather than attempting to preserve the old models (which I generally find to be sucktastic for creators).
Part of this emerging new environment obviously involves the potential for greater direct interaction with consumers and fans. I don't think taking advantage of this necessarily requires a creator to be a suck-up, but I do think being a [reverb] raging douchnozzle [/reverb] is probably a bad idea. Especially if you're acting that way towards people who actually bought your stuff with the monies, regardless of whether they liked it or not (omygawd, that's just tacky).
Another extremely important aspect of this new environment is the crazy-stupid-overwhelming variety and amount of all the distractions we can spend our time on. Books, comics, movies, television,
Trouble here is that we only have so much time to spend, especially if we have children or a social life or lizards. Consequently, we have to make choices on what-all to spend it on. (this is somethin' that high-up muckity-mucks in the entertainment world don't seem to grasp).
So, for example, if I have to choose between a game that's gonna aggravate me with DRM shenanigans, and one that doesn't use DRM (or not as much of it)... I'm gonna go for the one that uses less (or no) DRM.
Similarly, if it's a choice between a great book written by a seemingly decent person, and a great book written by someone who comes off like a gargantuan asshat, well, uh... that's really not a choice for me.
And dem dere's my two cents on alla'dat.
Sarge wrote: "Heh, how the wheel has turned. Not only does a writer have to be good at his/her craft, but they also have to stroke people's ego. So it's not about talent, as much as the ass kissing."Not really. It isn't ass kissing to genuinely want to interact with your readers. If the author is forcing themselves to be someone they aren't solely to sell books, that is ass kissing. And only bad authors are going to have to do that. So when Brandon Sanderson interacts with his readers, it's a bonus. The same way an author giving an interview is a bonus. Or are interviews ass kissing in your opinion too?
I'm pretty sure the literary world is pretty full of arrogant jerks. Google "Authors behaving badly," and you'll find pages upon pages of blogs detailing current infractions. You can even find sites detailing the "30 Harshest Author-on-Author Insults in History."While it's not new, I think that the internet brings about a much more immediate knowledge of this behaviour. Additionally, average readers now have a place to state their opinions on books. Actually many places given GR, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
So, if you consider James Joyce - widely considered an arrogant prick, it's not like he had to deal with the unwashed masses telling him Ulysses sucked. Then again, he probably wouldn't have given a damn anyway.
But now, you write a book (and lets face it, publishers are investing in a lot of pure crap without even considering self published books) and you get what you want - people read it. It's exciting! It's your hard work.
And then some random person comes along on the internet and rips it apart.
And then, with the internet, it becomes a bit of a matter of oneupmanship. The reader writes an honest (if harsh) review of a book hoping to help other readers. The author does something stupid on the internet. The readers take that public tantrum and make it (even more) public.
At the end of the day, I'd rather not hand my money to an author who shows a lack of respect to the people who buy and read their books. I try to avoid handing my good, hard-earned money over to people I don't agree with and I think authors need to be aware of that.
I don't care if a person is a complete, arrogant jerk. I do care if they treat their customers (readers) with disdain and a lack of respect. Because I'm part of that audience and love or hate the authors work, I deserve respect.
I also think that we'll see more and more of this as the self-esteem generation grows up. In many cases, they haven't had to deal with what some people might call the harsh realities of life. They may or may not be prepared for people who don't give a damn about their self esteem.
It would affect me because it is disrespectful. These authors put their works out there and its at a risk. Some people might like it and some won't but they shouldn't be making a game about it. You just have to say to yourself that its one persons opinion about it and move on. Take it as constructive criticism.
It might, but I try not to find out, to be honest. One of the genres I like is sci-fi. Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints have some metaphysical beliefs (if I understand correctly) that incline them towards writing that genre. There are beliefs and political stances taken by LDS authors that I disagree with -- some strongly. I feel better about spending my money to support people I agree with, but I still occasionally pick stuff up a few things at Walmart and I am typing this comment on a Mac -- both companies contribute to human misery on a fairly large scale. If I lose sleep over every less than savory purchase I make, I won't ever sleep. I feel a lot better about buying John Scalzi's stuff than Larry Correia's, though and I'm more likely to pimp Scalzi's stuff to my friends.
It's a really interesting topic. Honestly if I don't know the person on a personal level I don't feel I have the right to judge them that way. I couldn't justify loving a book for years and then finding out the person is a bigot and deciding to give up on all his or her books. I read a book or watch a movie because of the entertainment. Admittedly I I get really offended when someone of with so much exposure like that speaks out against things like being gay. (me actually being gay this does affect me sometimes) but I can't honestly say I'll stop enjoying their work. If I meet them in person sure I'll tell them about how I feel about them, then go home and pick up their book I had already been reading.It's a lot like businesses. Honestly I work at a store that the corporate company has had some controversy with the gay community. But my own store has been nothing but friendly to me so I'm not gonna quit my job just because of that.
It depends. I won't go out of my way to read Orson Scott Card due to his rants, and I'm likely not going to seek out someone who flips out over negative reviews or is just a really nasty person.But otherwise, we're all different, with different opinions, and as long as I don't find something personally vile, I'll continue to read their books until I notice their opinions that I find really offensive bleed too much into their books.
"But otherwise, we're all different, with different opinions, and as long as I don't find something personally vile, I'll continue to read their books until I notice their opinions that I find really offensive bleed too much into their books. "
That's a really good point, Leesa. I started to have trouble with the Sword of Truth series because it got so preachy. I have never looked up Terry Goodkind's personal beliefs, but I suspect they wouldn't be very much to my liking just based on the way they seemed to bleed into his books. I did finish the series, but I'm unlikely to read other books by him.
Very interesting discussion. I don't generally seek out information on authors. If I do, it's usually because I've already fallen in love with one of their books. If the turn out to be a cool person as well as a great author, awesome. If not, that's okay too. A little disappointing, but it doesn't really affect my enjoyment of their work.Knowing beforehand, though...that's tough. I guess it depends on how interested you are in the story they have to tell. For me, a good story trumps all.
I agree with a lot of what has already been said, but to add in my own two cents, I think that anyone's online "personality" is becoming more and more important in all aspects of business. Regarding authors, I think the impression they provide of themselves can do some serious damage to their readers (or potential readers). I haven't done any research into an author BEFORE I read their book(s) but have done some research afterwards. Gotta say that I've found out some things about authors that have paled my glowing impression of them, and made it difficult, if not impossible to continue reading their work. I don't give anyone the impression that I am a perfect person, so I don't expect anyone else to, authors included. But attacking a reader based on their review of your work just shows how immature and unprofessional you are. I have found out information about an author that lives close to me, that everyone I know seems to read, and based on what I know about him personally, I will definitely never, ever read his work. No online search needed.
Lisa W. wrote: "I stopped reading Orson Scott Card after I found out what a homophobic jackass he is."I have never read him, and will never, for this reason.
Lisa W. wrote: "I stopped reading Orson Scott Card after I found out what a homophobic jackass he is."I have never read him, and will never, for this reason.
It's a scale for me. If an author/artist is a jerk or wants nothing to do with fans -- I couldn't care less. If they respond poorly to criticism, I also don't care.If they have political/social/religious views substantially different from mine (which are anarcho dandyst libertine), it depends on how those views are expressed in their work. For the most part, I'm good. However, if a work begins to get exceptionally preachy, I might tune out simply out of boredom.
If an author expresses views I find to be particularly hateful, malicious, and damaging, I'm out. They're free to spout what they want, and I'm free to read something else. Lord knows there's enough books on my list without me having to spend time with authors whose views I find to be odious in the extreme.
i don't mind opinions no matter how bad they might be, what i dislike is the author's attitude to critical rewievs and those that differ in opinion whith the author's pov
I don't think great authors necessarily have to be nice people, but I appreciate authors with a good online presence (even if they hire people to help run their websites). If an author is particularly hateful (e.g. Orson Scott Card) I will avoid his or her work. If an author has public rants about fans or critics, I will laugh at him or her and think twice about reading the books. I'm more likely to look for fun authors at cons and buy extra fan swag from their website.
I really don't care so much about the authors. I mean I love people like John Green and Maureen Johnson because they are so interactive with their fans and build honest communities, but they're really the exceptions for me. I'm more about the stories that they tell rather than the person behind them, because for me the stories are an escape from the real world.
I'm not going to read every story an author puts out because, like I said, it isn't about the author to me, just the worlds they build.
If I do come across that they are a serious douchebag in real life then I probably won't read any of their work for fear of douchebaggy-ness coming out in the overall tone of the story.
Tangled wrote: "I don't think great authors necessarily have to be nice people, but I appreciate authors with a good online presence (even if they hire people to help run their websites). If an author is particul..."anyone feels the need of an " me likey" button just for this post?
Kamil wrote: "Tangled wrote: "I don't think great authors necessarily have to be nice people, but I appreciate authors with a good online presence (even if they hire people to help run their websites). If an a..."Aww thanks. :) I likey you right back.
The funny thing is that when I read, I separate the creator from the story. In a sense, I feel that if I have some sort of personal epiphany while thinking about fish imagery in Green Eggs and Ham, at some level it doesn't matter if Dr. Seuss had any intent to convey such a meaning. I still follow certain creators slavishly though, and I care what they say in interviews about their work. I think I did this even before my "Joss is God" phase--but the Internet does make me a bigger fan girl.
Great question and one that can be taken in many different directions1. Do "authors behaving badly" towards fans or reviewers or even other authors make people turn away from their books?
2. Do authors' political or social beliefs rub us the wrong way, which makes us not want to buy?
3. Do authors who have a good/funny/likable online (or offline) persona make us *want* to buy their books?
4. Overall, should the author's behavior or beliefs influence our purchases of his/her books?
Some thoughts of mine:
I loved Orson Scott Card's books for many years - and still love some of them. I've met him at book signings (I used to live in the same town as him) and he was always polite and very nice. He taught at my college for a special course in writing that took a lot of time and energy that he didn't need to do. He even spoke at one of the graduation ceremonies. So when I heard about his homophobia - and really, his hate-filled rants about LGBT individuals, it shocked me. It was more than the homophobia, it was his behavior based on that which made me hesitant to buy more of his books. As far as I could tell, none of the books of his I'd read had overt homophobic themes, so I felt okay about those. But then I read one of his short stories set in the Enderverse and it really got preachy. Now I prefer not to buy his books, but more because of his rants and the fact that some of his other attitudes I disagree with showed up in his books.
One of my favorite authors is the husband/wife writing team of Ilona Andrews. Their books are awesome, but their personality truly made me a fan. Their blog is witty, funny, self-deprecating, helpful, and just all-around great. They come across as people you'd want to be friends with. They write fiction and post some of it for free on their site. They've recently put some of it for purchase on Amazon because some of their fans couldn't get it any other way. Could I read these stories for free? Yes. But I wanted to give them back something for the enjoyment they've given me - both in their books and because they seem like such nice people. So I bought them even though I didn't need to.
Another author who has been a favorite of mine does post some about her political leanings in her blog. She clearly labels them as such and you can avoid them if you like. Now I tend to agree with her political statements so it's not a problem for me. But if I disagreed, I can see people not buying her books - she does have some strong opinions. However, I try to see it as 1) authors are people, 2) people have opinions, 3) authors have opinions. And just like other people, they should be able to share them - mostly appropriately like other people. But there are definite lines that can get crossed.
Like Mel Gibson :)
And in reference to Tangled's "Joss is God" phase, I would totally see/read most of Joss's work (even if it wasn't so awesome) because I fully stand with him on issues of feminism. So if authors' behavior can make us want to buy their products, it can do the converse, too.
If someone was a jerk but wrote something awesome, I might read it anyway. But if they were a racist, homophobic, or misogynist jerk, no. I just don't want to give money to that. Same thing goes for any other obvious political thing I don't want to support.Snarking on bad reviews is unprofessional but again, if the book is awesome, I'd still read it. Having been the recipient of two negative reviews by people I know didn't read the book (it was long out of print when they claimed to get new copies) and who were mad at me for personal reasons over disagreement on a forum about an unrelated TV show, I know how it burns to get bogus reviews. But I didn't attack them: I simply asked Amazon to remove them on the basis of being false. Amazon refused. So be it.
The fact is, some people do post intentionally harmful reviews and authors are human. I wouldn't let them snapping once or twice stop me from reading something I otherwise liked. But if they made it a habit, I'd question their professional abilities, including their ability to write.
I might actually give bonus points to an author who snarked on a review if they did so in a very amusing and well-written way. But it would have to be supremely witty and wonderful.
If I heard that an author that I liked did such horrible things like that publicly, I would never read any of their work again. If they are a jerk and expresses that in such a public way, there's just no way that the said author can do that and not expect any consequences what-so-ever despite any talent. There have been designers that I make it my business not to give them mine because I've heard what asses they are. I love to support things that I love but if they're a jerk what's the point? Now I'm not saying that you have to be nice all the time, but at least be respectable in the public. What this author is doing is unprofessional and who wants to deal with an adult brat?
I agree with the racist/homophobic/sexist/"x"-ist remarks not endearing me to an author and pretty much making sure that they'll never see another penny of mine ever again. They can certaintly have their views and speak their piece, but I don't need to fund it. Along those lines, I'd rather not know all that much about who I'm reading/watching/whatever, since I don't want to have to keep pushing that line... "Well, they're pro-gay rights, feminist, and color blind, but they club baby seals..." And I view authors and actors and singers, etc as artists and people, not paragons of virtue or examples to be followed. God knows I want my work judged on its quality, not on my off-hand joke about which Doctor I prefer. That said, I do think some explaination lies in the fact that the original comment came from an interaction with a self-published author? While not much of an excuse, I think I see a greater chance of that sort of... retaliatory commenting happening in those circumstances. While that isn't to say house published authors aren't above such actions, I think they have a greater responsibility to behave themselves. Or they ought to.
Sseeing as I usually get my books through the library, I don't have to worry about giving my money to an author that I think is a horrible individual (e.g. Cassandra Clare, after the whole plagiarizing incident - "Ms. Clare certainly at least skirted the line of what is legally considered plagiarism if not going a hop skip and jump over it" http://thedailyquirk.com/2012/05/21/552/). Personally, it all boils down to whether or not their rants/opinions/ickiness/racism/homophobism/sexism/whateverism is in their books. If it is, I won't read them. If it isn't, and I still like the book, sure why not.But I won't buy it unless I love it. And if they are going something truly horrible (someone mentioned something about puppies...?) I certainly hope they will be penalized for whatever it is. I don't think that my reading or not reading their book is really going to have any impact on them whatsoever.
Adding to what has been said above, I think it depends on the author and the situation.TS Eliot was a horrible anti-semitic and misogynist, but great poet. Virgina Woolf was racist. But I've read them anyway, well except for Woolf, but that's just because she puts me to sleep. There's also, Flanner O'Connor and Margret Mitchell who were racist. A friend told me once that she read them because it helped her understand that mentality - she said, and I quote, "I want to know how they view me, what their arguments are, so I can counter them."
Orson Scott Card - I'm not sure I can read. I have Enders Game somewhere or did. But read his rants before attempting it and now, just can't.
I've admittedly seen or read practically everything Joss Whedon has ever done. Although his later works have made me wonder about him. Is he practicing what he preaches? (shrugs)
Mel Gibson falls into the Orson Scott Card arena. I can't watch anything he's done after Braveheart. I can't watch him. Tom Cruise on the other hand, I'm more forgiving of.
And then there's, EL James, whose hilarious interviews and self-deprecating down to earth wit on some of those talk shows - got me to read a book I'd thought I'd hate (because I despise Stephanie Meyer and her novels (due in part to Meyer's religious politics and world-view), and James is a fan).
I think it depends on the writing, my mood, and how offensive I find the author, actor, or director. Mel Gibson and Orson Scott Card I find cringeworthy and offensive. Feel the same about Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly - can't read them either.
I've been thinking about this a lot lately. I loved the whole Ender's Game and Shadow series by Orson Scott Card, but reading about how homophobic he was REALLY turned me off. It's really hard for me to reconcile who I thought Card was, based on the morality espoused in Ender's Game, with who he is. Same with Nabokov, it's really hard for me to understand how someone who wrote so beautifully and with such deep intelligence, could be so profoundly homophobic. It seems like many of you have sworn off the authors in question, which certainly is a reasonable response. I just don't have that kind of willpower! I really love the way Orson Scott Card writes, and while I mostly get books from the library, I can't say I would never support him by buying a book. I remember when I swore off Domino's because they supported some social cause that made me sad...lasted about a year before I caved.
So, what I'm doing instead of swearing off of Orson Scott Card (and various others whose personal beliefs aren't in alignment with mine) is making an effort to be very aware of when Card is talking about things that I know I don't agree with him about. After all, the author has a privileged position of talking directly into your head. There are so few filters on the perception of reading, more than via any other medium, authors get to speak from a place that normally produces your own thoughts. That's not something to take lightly. So I'm making an extra effort to think of Card's writing as other and separate as I read his stuff that deals with certain social issues. I'm not committing to his universe on the same level that I normally would. For example, right now I'm half way through his Homecoming series, which has a gay character in it. As soon as he started describing him, after outing the character, I was really aware of the fact that I was READING, not just going along for the ride. I don't think it's even a conscious thing necessarily, but because I know how homophobic Card is, everything he says about gay characters is standing out to me. Same thing with Nabokov and Pale Fire.
TL;DR Homophobic authors have had their "speaking directly to my brain" privileges revoked, but I still read their stuff because my willpower to resist good writing is nonexistent.
Tanen wrote: "After all, the author has a privileged position of talking directly into your head. There are so few filters on the perception of reading, more than via any other medium, authors get to speak from a place that normally produces your own thoughts. That's not something to take lightly.Just wanted to say I really like what you've said there. It's so true and half of the time we don't even realize it because we are -in your words- just going along for the ride. Which is perfectly fine and one of the intended purposes of reading of course, but it can't hurt to be aware of the fact and put up some barriers up from time to time.
I usually lurk here - but this topic was too relevant to resist. I am getting very weary of the author behavior described in the very first post: the overreaction to negative reviews (going so far as to 'out' the real identities of reviewers (including where they live, hang out, and the fact that they have children!!!) in a blog; enlisting fans to gang up on negative reviewers; enlisting fans and friends to write glowing reviews to bump up ratings; endless Twitter bitchery, etc.) It's so..yuck. I was originally really excited to find and follow some of my favorite authors - and reviewers - online, but now I am thinking it might not be such a good idea. There was some intense hoopla yesterday - I guess it started on Twitter but I'm not sure - and it got really ugly.
I absolutely agreed with those writer I follow, but it was still not that great to witness. One author, who I think does an amazing job online (smart blog, funny Twitter, amazing q&as on GR) said she thought she was going to just stop interacting on the internets. Such a bummer, but maybe she's right. I think I am going to revise MY interactions, at least.
Nicki wrote: "Just want to note that this depends on where you live and what book you're taking out. Here in the UK, for instance, authors who live in the EU can get reimbursement from Public Lending Right when their books are taken out of libraries. (But authors who live in, say, the US get zip, to my knowledge.) If you're particularly passionate about ensuring that an author doesn't get any money from you, directly or indirectly, it's worth checking into your country's policies if you aren't already familiar with them."I live in the US, and we don't have anything like a "Public Lending Right" in most, if not all public or academic library, or in most special collections and private libraries. Authors get money from the original purchase, but not from any subsequent lending. So, in effect, the author has already gotten any money from the institution I am borrowing from, and one more person borrowing it doesn't change the author's revenue. But yes, it is important to know how things like this work where you are - especially for monetary issues and the like, both for your personal opinions and for how the lending institution works. (As a librarian, I get a lot of people asking me why my library doesn't have this or that, and the answer is always 'budget')
Tanen wrote: "After all, the author has a privileged position of talking directly into your head. There are so few filters on the perception of reading, more than via any other medium, authors get to speak from a place that normally produces your own thoughts. That's not something to take lightly.
It's not, and it is very important to recognize that, especially when you are reading something that you don't agree with (and there really is no way around that anymore). I think that intentional reading, where you can acknowledge the authors opinion without accepting, should be focused on more for younger kids, both at school and at home. Which then leads into my rant on banning books because you don't agree with their content. And I will stop there - that belongs on a totally different thread.
How do we differentiate between "good" boycotting (ie author has said homophobic slurs in the past) vs "bad" boycotting (ie don't want to read because author is female/different race/etc).It's subjective, isn't it?
It's entirely subjective, and one person's boycott is another person's "unfair attack". Look at what's happening this week with Tosh...those of us who are saying, "This is unacceptable and we don't want to patronize your comedy anymore" are being told we're censoring him. That's obviously untrue, because nobody's taking his right to speak away, but even by saying to Comedy Central, "We won't watch this show" we're being accused of censorship.What more content creators need to understand is that they themselves are a brand, and if that brand is damaged by something they do or say, attacking those who are peeved doesn't help. And sometimes part of a person's brand might be that they're outspoken on a given topic, which is fine, and often can be a positive. But when it's taken too far, it can be permanently marred, especially if not handled well.
I don't know about anything as organized as a boycott, but people certainly can use their subjective values in deciding what they want to spend their money on. There is nothing inherently wrong is being subjective unless people try to impose their decisions on others. I chose books for personal reasons. I like work that reflects my taste, values and interest. People will talk about what they like and don't like, and some ideas may spread (whether they are "good" ideas or not). That's as it should be. If the US Supreme Court holds that corporate money is "speech" and how they spend it to influence government cannot be regulated, then consumer money is also speech. Granted some of us can afford to speak louder than others when we reach for our wallets, but we have a right to our opinions just the same.Disclaimer: Most of the time I don't think about every possible political implication before I buy something. Something has to trigger one of my "hot buttons" for me to notice it.
Earlier today I went to Amazon to browse around. On the main page there was this piece about a self-published author, which linked to both her blog post about self-publishing and her book. The post was interesting so I got curious, clicked the book and stumbled upon a great number of raving reviews. I was tempted to buy the book, but for whatever reason I decided to check out the reviews on goodreads and shelfari first.
That's when I learned that the author had been acting pretty disrespectful to some people who left negative reviews. Making fun of reviewers on twitter in a game of online tag with another author, responding in what some would consider an inappropriate way to negative reviewers on Amazon, posting screenshots of the goodreads pages of negative reviewers on her FB page.
The effect on me was that I found myself not nearly as willing to spend my money on this author. It doesn't matter if it's 0.99 or 9.99. Both reading and writing are personal experiences and just as I believe the author had the right to put their work out there, I believe the reader has the right to express their personal opinion without being attacked or made fun of by the author.
This is not the first time this happened, and it probably won't be the last. It's been discussed on the amazon forums a number of times and an interesting read on the interaction between authors and reviewers can be found here: http://dearauthor.com/features/letter...
Right now I'm still debating whether or not to buy the book, I'm not sure if I should let this public/online image of the author dictate my decision. Who knows, I could be missing out on some great reads just because I let preconceptions take over.
Of course this is only one example, there are many other things (interviews, public appearances etc) that can have the same effect. Or the exact opposite, I'll be the first to admit that I've bought/read books by 'famous' people who really should have stayed away from the word processor, simply because I admired their public persona as I know it. ;)
Anyhow, I wondered if people recognize this and if so, how do you deal with it? Do you let this image or behavior by an author affect your decision to buy their (future) work?