wincing

[julesjones]

Well, I now know not to ever read a live-blogging review of one of my books... It wasn't one of my books that got eviscerated over at Dear Author this weekend, but it was a book by someone I've known a long time. It makes it rather more flinch-inducing than if it had been a stranger's book.

I'm not sure what to think about this, partly because I can't be completely detached over this particular example. I'm of the general view that authors need to learn to deal with critical and even abusive reviews (and to understand that the two are not identical), but I think live-blogging reviews have the potential to cross the line from snarking the book to snarking the author even when the reviewers are normally very clear on the difference, simply because they are immediate and off the cuff. I rather think that the best thing to do is to stay well away from one if you've got any emotional involvement at all.

ETA: This thread is now on screened comments which will be unscreened as and when I am around to do so, and disemvowelling will be applied if it becomes necessary. I apologise to those commentators who can disagree without being abusive, but some of the private email I'm getting suggests that it's now attracting drive-bys.

If you have come here from somewhere else, understand this: I am not a member of the Cult of Nice. I do not think readers should adhere to "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all" when discussing books. I do think that authors should consider whether they can handle adverse comment before reading it -- and that the particular form of comment I referred to up there has the potential to get under the skin of authors who are normally able to deal with adverse comment.

If you are reading that last sentence in the original post as anything other than having an implied "lest ye be tempted to be stupid in public" clause, and you post a comment, you may not get the reaction from me that you were expecting. Whichever side you think you're on.

Comments

[whitemunin.livejournal.com]

I read some of the transcript then stopped. Not my cuppa. It has nothing to do with mean-girl phenomena. I'm also very much in the camp of "put on your big girl panties" and accept the fact that people will love, hate, praise and mock the product you create. That transcript though just had a circus feel to me with a couple of ringmasters controlling it. Others may enjoy it. More power to 'em.

I started reading DA for the very balanced, straightforward reviews. They were no-nonsense and presented in a tone that was very objective, intelligent and thoughtful. I may not have always agreed with the assessment, but I respected the delivery.

Unfortunately, it feels to me (and YMMV), as if the site has lost a lot of that objective tone. It seems as if some of the Ja(y)nes now have a different goal, and that's entertaining the audience in ways that have more of the "train wreck" feel to them. If that's their current intent, fine. Their playground, and I can enjoy a good train wreck with the best of them. However, those kinds of blogs are a dime a dozen these days, and I'll miss the uniqueness of DA as it was when I first started reading there.

I now go to Karen Knows Best for book reviews (never thought I'd say that about KKB). I love AztecLady's very measured, forthright reviewing style and hope she sets up her own review site in the near futre.

As a reader, I don't have a lot of sympathy for an author or his/her editor whose product gets knocked around by the public. Comes with the territory. I've never thought of books as children. They're merchandise. However, as an author myself, I'm sympathetic because no matter how logical you try to be, stuff like that always stings, and like you, I winced at some of the stuff I read in the transcript.

It's sort of like getting a bad annual review from your boss, but instead of just you and the boss in a conference room, it's you, the boss, your coworkers and the employees of six other departments who get to hear how your work sucks.

Don't know if it helps, but because of the stir this has caused, the author's book is now on a lot of radars, so hopefully that will translate to a respectable number of sales. Good luck to her on that score.

[oracne.livejournal.com]

I (the author) didn't read the transcript, though a friend gave me a summary. Didn't see the point. I don't think anyone involved was looking for the author's input!

[julesjones]

It's actually relatively civilised compared to Fan Feuds We Have Known, though I'd still advise you not to look at it.

[oracne.livejournal.com]

*heh* "I get worse wank than that with my breakfast cereal!"

[whitemunin.livejournal.com]

I'm with Jules on this one. Compared to some of the stuff that goes on in fandom, it's relatively mild, but not something I'd curl up on the couch to read.

[julesjones]

I've been doing a lot less blog-reading since I started a full time day job, so I don't really have an opinion on whether the tone of DA has shifted in the last few months. But yes, that's why I was reading DA religiously for a long time.

I'd expect oracne to file it under "20% of the readers will hate the book no matter what". It falls, as you say, into that area where what you know as a logical thought process and what your emotions are yelling are two different things. You learn to deal with that, or you get out of the game.

[(Anonymous)]

If I were the author, I'd avoid the live blog transcript. I don't think she could *learn* anything from reading it. It would be rather like stepping into a wasp nest.

I don't think many writers' books, novellas et al could withstand the word by word, paragraph by paragraph, scrutiny that this author's work was subjected to. While a book is the sum of its parts, in the end it is the whole of the writers' vision that either works or doesn't. It just seems to me there was an element of unfairness to the live blogging effort. It made me squirm.