A less good review...

[julesjones]

Mrs Giggles didn't like Lord and Master. On the other hand, she did give it a 68, and said that someone looking for a low-conflict romance might enjoy it, in a way that I don't think was pure snark.

This is the sort of thing I was talking about in my post last year on review writing. A good reviewer recognises that other people have different tastes, and says enough about why they liked or disliked a book for other readers to calibrate to their own taste. Yes, I'd much rather she loved the book, but this is still a helpful review, even if it stings.

Comments

[samcdermott65.livejournal.com]

I didn't get the impression that she was being snarky about the low-conflict romance remark. However, it was clear that this story is not the type of thing she personally enjoys. Hence the low rating. Everyone has their personal opinions and taste. Of course, I would expect someone who does reviews professionally to be more objective and not let their personal tastes get in the way. Is she a professional reviewer? Never heard of her so please excuse my ignorance.

I loved the story. I found it very entertaining. I loved the characters and the reverse stereotype.

shari

[julesjones]

I know other people have liked the book for exactly the same reasons she disliked it. I didn't *think* she was being snarky, but I've got tonsillitis and I'm not very with it this morning.

Mrs Giggles is a well-known romance reviewer, for values of "well-known" that include "notorious". She's not a professional reviewer, but a private individual who posts her opinions of what she's been reading. Rather like I've been doing, only she's been at it a lot longer and gives very detailed reviews. And if she doesn't like something, she says so. Loudly. :-)

Her reviews are subjective, but she's very blunt about the fact that they are about her personal reaction to a book, and she understands the difference between an objective flaw in the book and a "not my taste" issue. So someone reading that review who'd *like* a gentle, low-conflict romance can see that even if Mrs Giggles didn't like it, they might.

I knew when I offered her a review copy that I could get roasted. 68 is actually not too bad from her.

[samcdermott65.livejournal.com]

Hope you feel better soon. Seems like everyone is getting sick.

Thanks for explaining about Mrs. Giggles. She definitely gives a very detailed review. Kinda reminds me of my 9th grade english teacher. I'm not familiar with all the reviewers and such except for what I've been exposed to on LJ. I read the ones that get posted here, but I don't actively go looking for them. I don't use reviews to make my book purchase decisions.

shari

[julesjones]

I'd heard of her, but hadn't ever looked at her site until a couple of weeks ago, when emilyveinglory linked to some interesting blog posts she'd made about the romance ebook market. But I know a lot of romance authors take her pretty seriously because she's willing to say if she didn't like something. It can be pretty ego-denting to get a poor review from someone like that, but on the other hand you know that a good review is sincere.

I'm doing the reviews for myself as much as anything. Makes it easier to look up a book a while later and see whether I liked it and why, plus it's actually a good writing exercise to analyse a book after reading it to see why it worked or didn't work. Analysing other people's writing is one way to improve your own. But I know some of my friends enjoy reading the reviews (as someone said, it's quicker than reading the book:-), and occasionally someone buys something as a result. It's not that they were looking for the book already -- it's that the review draws their attention to the existence of a book that they can see they might like.

In a similar manner, my wish list at Amazon is heavily populated by books someone's mentioned during a discussion at Making Light. They're books I didn't know about until someone mentioned them, but they sound interesting and the wish list is a handy way of remembering them for later.

[(Anonymous)]

I *like* gentle, low-conflict romances in general. They feel more realistic to me. Mrs Giggles says:

"After all, it's easy to say "I love you!" when life is all about roses and chocolates. Put the characters under some test, such as having to deal with a significant conflict of opinion when it comes to some aspect of their lives together, and perhaps I will find their romance more compelling to read about."

Hmm. I didn't get the impression from reading extracts of your work that you do 'roses and chocolates' type scenarios. And these two are having to negotiate the fact that (a) they're gay and (b) one of them is the other's boss. That alone sounds like enough to create a few problems for them. And my feeling about some of the higher-conflict romances is 'well, sure, you say you love each other because you're on an adrenaline high due to the conflicts you've had/villain you've been battling together, but what about when it comes to day-to-day living?'. So yes, definitely a question of taste, and I think Mrs Giggles recognised that and it was reflected in the fairly good grade she gave it. She definitely didn't tear the book apart the way I've seen her do with some others.

Laura

[julesjones]

There's conflict, but it's implicit rather than explicit -- largely around the fact that gay or not, they're still having to deal with the power imbalance inherent in a relationship between a middle-aged CEO and a young PA just finishing his PhD. Though in the end that works in their favour, because by the time they get around to talking about whether this is more than friends with sex, they've already established a solid relationship.

If the numerical score had been a lot lower, I'd be a lot more worried. But having read a few of her reviews to get a feel for her style, I don't think she'd have given it a reasonable grade if she thought the book was a waste of time for all readers.

[hafren.livejournal.com]

Yes but... when she says " I find myself wondering whether I am the correct person to assess this book", on account of being a "doddering heterosexual woman" who doesn't find m/m very fascinating (strange, says this doddering heterosexual woman who can't get enough of it), I can't help feeling: well yes, you should actually have passed it on to someone else. I also think that when she complains of not enough conflict/issues to resolve she underestimates how much in the way of issues arises just from being gay in a straight world.

[julesjones]

Well, she's a private individual, so she doesn't have anyone to pass it on to. She likes m/m, but I think her tastes would run to something that's a lot more explicit with the conflict. There's some conflict in this one, but part of the point was that Steven *does* get away with having a pretty male secretary because he's high enough up the status system to do so. She's absolutely right when she suggests that the target audience is the group that wants to read about a gay couple getting it together without that much hassle. The guys get some anti-gay aggro, but most of the time people just don't want to say anything about it for various reasons.

[niobedancing.livejournal.com]

Holy cow - that's one of the nicest reviews I've ever seen her write. And you have the Spotlight Review!!! Free publicity yay!

I do enjoy seeing Mrs. Giggles skewer some authors *cough cough*LaurellKHamilton*cough*. I haven't read Lord and Master so I can't say if I think she's smoking crack or what. I can understand that it stings - it sucks to hear her say that the characters you love and lived with for so long have no meaningful conflict - but it does feel like she tried really hard to point out the good things that she liked, and to admit that it might be just what some readers are looking for.

Here's hoping you don't take it too hard. :)

[julesjones]

She's certainly written nicer reviews, but it's much more of a "I didn't like it but other people might" than a "this sucked". I'd *much* rather have a careful, thoughtful, "I didn't like it" from someone known to be a tough reviewer than a bland "well, it's ok I suppose" review that that doesn't say much. It stings, but if I couldn't take something on that level, I wouldn't have submitted it to her in the first place. Of course, if she'd *really* shredded it, I'd be a lot more upset. She gave someone 01 earlier this month...

Anyway, when I emailed her this morning to do the standard, "Erm, I'm Ms not Mr" (which she corrected immediately), I said she's welcome to a review copy of something else if she'd like one. Though I might discourage her from Dolphin Dreams, because if she thought L&M was short of conflict she might think the same of DD, and that's 100 kwords of implicit rather than explicit conflict, not 60 kwords. Well, it might be a bit shorter when Raven gets through scribbling on it, but not *that* much shorter. :-)

[niobedancing.livejournal.com]

lol Yeah, I saw one place that still said "Ms. Jones blah blah his characters..."

It's hard to know what to recommend to her since she says she's not all that into hot male/male sex. My favorite solo title of yours is Spindrift 1.

I now feel like going to search for the 01 rating...