Connecting Readers and Writers discussion
Writer's Station
>
BAD review or NO review. That is the question.
Russell, thank you for responding so quickly.Literature as a whole is very different now than it was even ten years ago. You can get new content with the push of a button. I also think because of that, it makes books available to a more diverse group of people.
I'm probably naive, in my want to believe that a reader isn't careless. They buy your book under the good faith that they will enjoy what is inside. Sometimes they don't, sometimes they can't understand your voice, or message, or whatever it is, that disconnects them from the story. I think that has more to do with perception than being careless.
Not everyone likes the same things. I hope that my work finds its way into hands that will enjoy it, but there are no guarantees. All we can do is hope for the best, and take the good with the bad. Again, probably naive, but I'm hopeful that whenever that bad review comes around, that I'm gracious in the moment.
As far as my generation being easily distracted, I am 29 years old, I have two loud boys, and I can read a book in a day. Maybe my devouring a book so quickly leaves me missing some vital symbols and deeper messages, but I still read it, and I enjoy it most of the time.
I hope I am not a careless reader, but I'd hate to be called such because of my age. I can't say that I speak for my generation because I have no cell phone, and when I read, I shut out everything. Screaming kids, the tv, phone, and computer. The house could burn down and I probably wouldn't notice. If I'm pulled into a story I am in it, but again I can't speak for my generation, to them I'm an old woman who prefers books to twitter, and cell phones.
Andrew Klavan, who recently started writing YA fiction said that in the genre it's no longer enough to write a good story. You have to write a kind of story that would make a potential reader shut down the computer, put down the portable video game, and want to concentrate on the book instead. It think to a lesser extent it's true with adults. There's stuff on TV, Facebook (Goodreads too LOL), movies on demand etc. So a book has to not only GET your attention, but also KEEP it for a prolonged time period to be appreciated.
Masha,Agreed.
That said, it's a deal writers have to make with their readers.
If you (as a reader) plunk down your $$$ for (and, much harder, commit your time to) a given work because you know the genre -- or maybe even the writer's name -- the writer is then obligated to deliver a well-executed story. And no excuses for unnecessary verbiage, typos, adolescent jokes or sloppy syntax.
In return for that -- at least it seems to me -- a reader has to give the writer the benefit of his or her full attention.
Russell
Actually on a not-unrelated note, I hate reviewers who say how much they spent on the book. Who cares? There's a lot that goes into the book's price, but aside from good editing the price has nothing to do with whether or not it's a good story. I get most of my books at the library, but if I come across a dud, I'm just as upset over a loss of my time as I would over paying for something I didn't enjoy. So for me it's a turn off when a reviewer says "Not worth my $10" instead of using the valuable review space to actually talk about the good and bad parts of the book itself. I'm always tempted to comment on those reviews and ask, "Would it be worth $8? $3? Would you give it more stars then?"
Now I disagree with both Masha and Russel.I worked very hard to control the price of my work because I felt it important to have a fair price for what I was making available and understanding that I'm not James Paterson or Steven King. I'm asking someone to take a chance on me and so I think it's fair to make the cost of entry as low as is honestly feasible.
And to Russell: No one owes a writer anything. They don't owe us their attention. They don't owe us a review. They don't owe us anything beyond civil courtesy when discussing our works. Unless someone recieves a book as part of an arrangement (ie here's a free book to review on your website) there is nothing owed.
I don't care if someone reads my book on the couch with the lights low, in bed while sick, on the subway, or while feeding a fussy baby. I'm happy that it got read. I'm happy that I provided them a touch of entertainment ~When They Wanted It~ not when it was convenient for me.
The writer is obligated to tell a good story, but that comes out in how people select what to read. And "good story" varies a great deal. One person's good story is another person's rolling bore.
Rob,De gustibus non est disputandum.
Russell
Russell,Good taste is in the eye of the beholder. Everyone's perception is different, therefore their views on what is in good "taste" are different as well.
I think Rob has hit the nail on the head. Readers don't owe authors anything. Does owning a car mean I am obligated to drive. Does owning a TV mean I have to pay attention to it? Readers pay for our work. Once they do it's theirs. They can read it or not. If they do read it they can come back and review it or not. We would all like to think every reader will read our work, pay close attention and write a good insightful (and hopefully favorable) review. But they are in no way obligated to do so.
It's frustrating when you get trashed online and even more so when you feel like you don't deserve it. Ultimately though it's not under your control and lashing out will only make you look bad.
Rachel,Who said anything about lashing out?
Russell
Sheesh! Where did that come from? To answer the question, it's possible to own a car and never drive it, or have TV on but not watch it, but it's wasteful and silly. SO the PRESUMPTION is the author does his best to write and the reader, having acquired the book, will read it and then may or may not to review it. "Owe" may be a strong word because it carries a legalistic connotation; it's more like "I do my part, hoping/assuming you would do yours."I am an accountant and once worked for a large corporation where we produced bound monthly reports for internal distribution. They had to be mad just so, perfectly formatted and everything, distributed by an unbreakable deadline. Once visiting a marketing department, I saw our latest report under a planter. I have to admit I wasn't happy. BUT producing that report was my job, I get paid for it, so whatever. Now imagine if I took years to make it, by myself, poured my heart and soul into it... See my point?
Masha,Once again, agreed.
And to return for a moment to Rachel's analogy and to your extension of it, the dealer/salesman of the car/television doesn't care whether you, the consumer, use the one or watch the other. After all, he's already collected his commission.
However, the guy who put in long hours and much love to design and engineer one or the other to perfection might just be a bit miffed if he saw that his efforts were merely collecting dust -- and without so much as a dust cover.
Russell
Russell,Sadly I agree. Unfortunately I doubt a reader (that isn't a writer) thinks about the hours the author spent creating the story. The time spent away from family and friends while they molded their literary sculpture. The years of research and days dedicated to beating their heads against the keyboard when they were ironing out a paticularly hard scene or dialogue.
I don't think readers (that aren't writers) really understand how much work it takes to create a novel. Even the stuff that can be punched out in months instead of years takes time and dedication. Before I wrote for myself I can honestly say I never thought about it. I respected the work, but I didn't really understand the dedication and sacrifice that went into creating a novel.
Ashley
Ashley,'Tis true. 'Tis all too true.
That said, every real passion in life requires some sacrifice. Writing -- at least to my way of thinking -- is one of the more pleasurable ones.
Russell
Russell, I was not intending to imply that anyone in this discussion was lashing out. I was merely trying to say I understand the frustration of getting bad reviews. I've seen authors both online and in person, lash out at readers that felt "didn't get their work". I can understand what they are going through but it's a dangerous trap to get into. As writers we spend countless hours crafting our stories, writing our novels and editing and re-editing the book. They are like our babies.
But when we become authors, our children are grown and leave the house. We can't protect them from callous readers who could care less about the hours that went into them.
If someone stops you in the grocery store to tell you they liked your latest book, that's great but you can't force that person to go home and write a customer review on Amazon. If some anonymous person decides they hate your book because you started it out with "the", you are powerless to stop them from bashing it online. That's the unfortunate reality.
Rachel,You get no argument from me here.
Russell
But that's part of it.If someone doesn't "Get it" with your book, there are many possible reasons. One could simply be... you didn't do a good job writing it.
I've got a story I'm massaging (I'll shamlessly link it: Becca - A zombie story and it's a tough story to get right because it involves two people but three names. Short form: There's one girl. In her point of view she refers to herself by her own name, Kim. In the boy's point of view she's referred to as Becca, because he thinks he's with his old HS flame. So as the story toggles from his to her point of view the name of the character changes.
It's meant to keep the reader off balanced a little, to give a sense of the psychosis taking over Garrett's mind. But it can also be confusing to the reader. I've done quite a few revisions of the begining page because I want the reader to know for sure what's going on as soon as possible.
When a Beta reader reads it and says "I don't get it" I don't blame them. I don't ask "where were you reading it?" I don't say "Did you turn off your iPod? Were the kids in bed?" I say "okay, you didn't get it. Tell me how and I'll revise it".
Will it someday be read by people who still don't get it? Sure. I know Brooks has that problem with World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War. I loved it. Others hated the format. But that's how it goes.
I'm going to keep ranting a moment: I've noticed a very anti-author attitude in some corners of Goodreads. Writers are seen as demanding, whiney, soft skinned, and generally not even worth paying for creating content. We take ourselves too seriously, we can't take negative feedback, and we run crying to each other to point fingers at the bullies. I really don't see how talking about how we'd rather get no reviews than a bad one, or how people should be in a certain state of mind to "get us" really helps.
Rant off
@Rob.Fair enough.
I also gave up on James Joyce's Ulysses after 93 pages, though it wasn't for lack of concentration. Maybe some of us are just stupid -- or bad readers.
Russell
Just adding my 2cents... I happen to agree with Rob and various others in this post. I read just about anywhere possible (I LOVE my kindle!) does this make me a bad reader? I don't think so, in fact I think it makes me a bloody good reader!
I may give books a 1 or 2 star review, but I also state why. If I didn't get it, it's not usually because I was sitting on a bus or I had a head cold, or that I was sitting in a room in complete silence. Sometimes what the author wants to come across just doesn't for the reader. Similarly, the reader can take things to different levels, ones that the author may never have intended.
I believe it's no one person's fault for this. I believe that as writers we do the best we can (and always strive to keep getting better) at putting OUR ideas into written form and let it go off into the world. If Joe Bloggs doesn't get what I wrote, it may be that I suck as a writer, it may also be that how my thought processes work are different from Joe Bloggs. It may be differing personal opinions, spiritual beliefs, or any other vast number of things.
I believe that any review, ANY review is worth something. The reader has been moved (or possibly bribed) enough to spend their time writing it, be it good, bad, ugly, glamourous, humourous... whatever. They've done it.
*shrugs*
Maybe I am too forgiving in this, I haven't published anything (yet), but even when I do get there, and I may get my 1 or 2 star reviews or none at all, I will know that it truly doesn't matter. I wrote the damn book for myself anyway. :D
@Lynxie."I wrote the damn book for myself anyway. :D"
Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit and bullshit again.
If that's the case, cease and desist -- and get yourself out of this thread and out of the publishing world.
If you can't be honest enough to admit at least to yourself why you choose to publish, please don't waste our collective time. Go find yourself a flashlight and write your diary underneath the covers. And then, bury it.
Russell
Russell wrote: "@Lynxie."I wrote the damn book for myself anyway. :D"
Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit and
bullshit
again.
If that's the case, cease and desist -- and get yourself out of this thread and out of..."
Thank you for your thoughts Russell. My reasons for publishing are my own and if I so choose to publish my story it will be because I want to. I wrote the story for myself, I choose to share it with others, but I didn't write it for anyone else.
@ Russell @Lynxie-I'm in the middle of a very good fantasy trilogy by Michael Sullivan who in an interview (published at the end of the first book if you're interested) said the reason he started writing is because he couldn't find good stories for himself to read. Could be bullshit, but it takes all kinds, esp. in the artistic community so I wouldn't deny people having different motivations. I personally believe most authors write because they feel they have something unique to say/share, but maybe not. People read for different reasons, so they can write for different reasons as well.
@Masha - I have read Michael's work! I loved it :) he is very gifted when it comes to writing! He really draws you in to his story. From my interactions with Michael I would be more inclined to believe him, if he said he wrote his books because he couldn't find anything good for himself, then I think it is true.I do agree with you though, a lot of people believe they have something to share/say with others, and I think that is fantastic, given that I read a heap of books, I would have a lot of time on my hands if those authors hadn't felt the need to share their work. :)
Cheers!
However, even someone like Michael who started writing "for himself" still cares what people think about his writing. So for people who say "I write what I write and I don't give a rip what everyone thinks," THAT's likely bullsh1t. No one is that self-contained. You can (and should) grow a thick skin as an author, but not to the point of not caring at all.
Did I say I wouldn't care? I don't think I did. I said it wouldn't matter about the 1 or 2 star reviews, because I wrote it for me. I have no illusions that if someone tells me my work stinks it won't hurt. I have seen enough of them on Amazon and GR to know how stinging they can be, I just don't see bad reviews as a showstopper... They are just someone else's opinion, which should be respected and listened to, but you don't have to agree.I am sure some of my reviews may have hurt authors feelings, but it wasn't through lack of respect for their effort and I hope they can take some of what I had to say as constructive, but we must do as you say Masha and grow a thicker skin and not lash out at those who do not share our beliefs.
@Ashley.Yes, it was. My apologies.
Russell
The one thing about bad reviews is that they can really destroy something while it's trying to build critical mass.Any work that is going to "go anywhere" either needs a great deal of marketing, or it needs to develop enough curb-appeal that when someone stumbles onto it, they decide to take a chance on it. A few low reviews early in a work's "life" can really slow down the rate at which people take a chance on it.
It's great when buyers are willing to look past those reviews, or to read the actual text, but it can also be very disheartening.
This might sound ungrateful but the thing that bugs me slightly with the reviews I've received is that people are too generous with the ratings they give.Going back to the initial question I would rather get bad reviews than none at all because any feedback is helpful. I've published 10 ebooks so far this year and some of them have yet to receive a text review at all. The ratings people give indicate that they're being enjoyed but I'd love the greater degree of feedback a text review gives.
Oliver,You say "ten books," but I read here at your Goodreads personal page that you just published your first novel. I'm confused. Do you mean 9 stories and 1 novel, or 10 actual books?
Also, are you offering to reciprocate? If you offer to exchange reviews with another writer -- say, a short story in exchange for a short story read and review -- you might have more luck.
Russell
Russell,Sorry, confusing terminology - you're right, 1 novel and 9 short stories. I hadn't considered the option of "trading" reviews with other authors. It's an interesting idea.
Olly
Olly,It's the absolute best way to get an honest and articulate review.
Russell
Russell,Thanks - I'll give it some serious thought.
Olly
Olly,Please do.
If you don't find any other takers, you can always find me here.
Russell
Rob wrote: "The one thing about bad reviews is that they can really destroy something while it's trying to build critical mass.Any work that is going to "go anywhere" either needs a great deal of marketing, ..."
Well stated. For a new author it can be extremely upsetting and make the question their value as a writer too.
Denise wrote: "It doesn't really matter, authors can't control reviews...but I'll take them. Most people can decipher what is actually being said about a book and weigh whether or not they want to buy the book...."
Then there are those who decide to attack the author through a "review" as well.
well they're not really reviews are they? Most people can work out that it's an attack on the author for whatever reason the 'reviewer' believes...I think most people see them and skip right over them and in most instances you can ask the site to remove them if they're really bad.
Lynxie wrote: "well they're not really reviews are they? Most people can work out that it's an attack on the author for whatever reason the 'reviewer' believes...I think most people see them and skip right over..."
True. I've read some that were obvious attacks and it's so childish. But, that doesn't stop it from hurting the over all ranking.
Very true Catrina. It's a shame people have to be that petty! Attacking a person because they don't share the same views as you, or whatever is very immature. It just shows that some people are more mature than others.
Lynxie wrote: "Very true Catrina. It's a shame people have to be that petty! Attacking a person because they don't share the same views as you, or whatever is very petty. It just shows that some people are more..."
That's true too. We won't make it in the writing business if we don't have {or grow} a thick skin. Five years or harsh crits will help with that. XD
When I look for books I'll glance over reviews, the glowing and the terrible. Ultimately what makes me buy the book is the description, the hook so to speak.
Ashley wrote: "When I look for books I'll glance over reviews, the glowing and the terrible. Ultimately what makes me buy the book is the description, the hook so to speak."
I go by the blurb and the cover art. I'll glance at the reviews, but ultimately I make my own decisions.
Denise wrote: "Catrina wrote: "Then there are those who decide to attack the author through a "review" as well. ..." Yes they do, but an attack on the author is obvious. I'd rather other people read the review ..."
That's a good point. I like listening to, or reading people discuss my book. It gives me insight to what did and didn't come out as intended.
Overall ranking is more of a popularity contest, in it's not the important issue. We need to be reminded of that sometimes. :)
When chosing a book I base it on the blurb first, glance over reviews second, and cover and rating third.
Lynxie wrote: "When chosing a book I base it on the blurb first, glance over reviews second, and cover and rating third."Interesting. I see the cover art first, then read the blurb. I read the reviews last. Usually by the time I've read the blurb I've already made my decision.
Yeah I used to notice the cover first, and occasionally a really good one will still catch my eye, but I have to be honest and say some of the best books I've read have got truly horrible covers, or covers that are just 'meh'! So I'm glad that I didn't pass over them because their cover didn't instantly appeal like some people tend to do. But I am all for eye-catching and beautiful covers!
I think there's also something to be said here too for those reviews that are filled with gifs and stuff. They attract A LOT of attention here on GR, take this one: http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/... for the 50 Shades of Grey books!
The reviewer is highly amusing! I think I just about snorted with laughter while reading the reviews, and she HATED the books. I haven't read the books so I can't comment on the content (yet) but I think despite the bad review, she's given this book a huge boost in numbers even just on GR alone! Of course it doesn't hurt that it's wildly popular at the moment either!
True, but some sites don't allow gifs in reviews. I found the review amusing too.
Good or bad - ANYTHING that somebody (other than you) puts on the internet will feed the Google, Bing, and other search engines -- pointing to ... YOUR BOOK.Ironically a thousand bad reviews will probably do more for your book in the long run than 100 very good ones.
It depends to some degree on the immediate reading environment. If it's library-quiet (or better) a reader is much better able to concentrate. If it's a subway car, however, it's damned difficult not to get distracted.
That said, I'm afraid a lot of your generation simply can't concentrate regardless of the immediate environment. (This is a discussion I've had any number of times with my children -- ages 20 and 18 -- so I'm not exactly talking out of my ass.)
It's a question of too many inputs. And if one can't turn off a cell phone or get away from a beeping computer (every time an e-mail lands on your "doorstep"), one is going to find it very difficult to stay glued to the matter at hand.
Russell