The more complex world part is very true and something that I do believe is overlooked (underated? misunderstood?) a lot, too. It only took a few years of being involved in various romance forums online before I learned that there were several distinct “levels” to the heirarchy within this “community” that needed to be respected if for no other reason than for the sake of clarity. Which isn’t all that surprising because that’s true with every community.

What is surprising is how much a large number of people within this one tend to try to deny those distinctions exist and instead, intentionally or unintentionally, try to promote the idea that we’re all this big happy family of readers, some of whom just happen to have written the books we read and some of whom sit in judgement of those same books. (Notice that last could be applied just as much to publishers/editors as reviewers.)

The problem is that on the surface it’s a beautiful concept to want us all to be considered the same but on a deeper level it’s very impractical if carried too far or applied in the wrong place at the wrong time because it will then muddy many issues in the extreme.

I appreciate your response and your expanding the question into the next logical nuance. All this is I think a legitimate issue which maybe should be at least discussed since reviewers, romance review sites and blogville are turning into the new opinion-makers and thus have a certain cache and a certain amount of power. Don’t get me wrong. They are filling a vacume that really needed filling and I congratuate all those who take it on. But with success comes those snarky ethical considerations, and while I don’t pretend to know the answers (or even the right questions), it’s something that ought to at least be thought about.

Ironically, there’s a fascinating discussion going on now at Smart Bitches about selling ARCs (a “recurring” controversy). I’ve weighed in, but as I noted there, conflict of interest is a consideration. Good grief, I don’t mean to equate this or that with anything like public policy conflicts or indicate that there’s anything legally at stake, but romanceland is a more complex world that most of us reckoned and this just seems like the next step (so to speak).

lol. I’m not nice…. ask some of my friends. What I am is practical. Or I try to be when it comes to my profession. I learned my lesson early on, within a few months of getting published and it helped me keep a fairly clear head about some things.

The bottom line is that while yes, our books may be our babies, we all like different stuff.

Is there a writer alive that can say that they have loved everything they’ve ever read? If not, then the writer needs to prepare herself for one simple fact. SOMEBODY won’t like their book. It’s a fact of life. We may hate seeing it get shredded in a review, but a review is just one person’s opinion. Chances are, there is somebody who loved the book that got shredded. So long as you’ve got people who like your writing, you can’t let it get to you when others don’t.

Keeping this in mind makes it easier to deal with it when somebody doesn’t care for a book you’ve written.

as to your other question, I wouldn’t ask a friend to review a book. Another lesson I learned… I do have several friends that are reviewers but most of them don’t review my stuff for just that reason. Now if I’m looking for an honest opinion… does this work~does this suck~is this stupid~ I have a couple of friends that I ask and I ask them because I can trust them to be honest. I expect them to be honest. I’m not looking to get my ego stroked. Believe me, I don’t need that. ;)

My question has more to do with the simple problem of knowing the perspective of the individual asking it because the question you posed is a lot more complex than most realize or possibly acknowledge. That complexity makes it, if not necessary, then at least wise to know to whom I’m speaking.

I don’t know about the rest of the readers here, but I do know that I’ve learned from experience that, yes, there is a gap between readers and authors. There’s also a gap between readers and “real” reviewers although many of those later individuals don’t want to admit to it any more than some authors do.

This is not the same thing as saying that those individuals aren’t also readers. Or that they can participate in readers discussions as readers. It does however impact upon aspects of professionalism by all concerned because once the choice has been made to become either an author or a reviewer there are times when that has to be the persona being presented. And that directly impacts upon the question you asked.

I don’t review in the professional sense. Heck, I’m not even completely sure I’ve ever reviewed in the amatuer sense. The one thing I do know is that there is no way that I would be able to “analyze” something written by someone I truly considered a friend – whether that was a book or a review . . .

Are there “professionals” who do “review” the works of their friends? Possibly and probably, but I honestly believe as consumers we’d be quite correct in questioning the conflict of interest they were creating for themselves. (Yes, I know that’s a legal term that may or may not apply here, but I believe it gets the idea across.) Conversely, “defending” works by friends is just as questionable, again whether we’re talking books or reviews.

However, if we’re not talking about “professionals” then we’ve entered a completely different area. As a reader blogger who doesn’t even pretend to review, I would have no qualms about “promo-ing” a friends book, especially if I enjoyed it. I’d probably feel compelled to say up front that the author was in fact a friend. That’s just me, but I suspect that many of the others here would feel similarly.

In all seriousness though, I won’t take out a sworn affidavid, but I will tell you, I’m a reader and romance fan and sometimes participant at romance-related internet sites. I comment when something grabs my interest and represent nothing and nobody but my own views. I haven’t the patience to be be a blogger or owner, the talent to be a writer or have the temperment necessary to read a surfeit of abysmal books to be a reviewer. I am exactly who I represent myself as, and whether I call myself lurker1 or Jezebel, what you see is what I am. Again, and although you have no reason to believe me, I am singularly constitutionally unable to participate in conspiracies–I’m one lousy liar. Oh, and in books as in real life, I have a visceral and absolute negative reaction to back-stabbing and betrayal–they’re right at the top of my list of “sins”.

If I know someone or admire someone personally, I think it would be very, very difficult to give an “honest” response to one of their books even if I thought it was consumate crap. And that would be really unfair, wouldn’t it? Honor demands that each book be judged on its own merit and I don’t think that would be at all easy if there’s a personal relationship between author and reviewer. So, reviewers and blog owners, how do you deal with this condundrum? Or is it even a condundrum for you? I really am interested.[/quote]

Hmmm, I have to admit that I’d feel more comfortable responding to this, Lurker1, if you’d at least identify yourself in some way. Not necessarily by name or even screen name but where you sit in the so-called grand scheme of things – reader, author, academic, whatever. I say that not to draw those “us vs. them” lines that many are so leery of but simply as a point of reference for continued discussion.

Plus, too, many of us have been burned in the past by anonymous posters and frankly I don’t normally waste my time on them unless there’s a valid reason to do so upfront. That is nothing against your posts in this thread, just a statement of fact and a recognition that you’re asking for more interaction on a more or less tangential topic to this thread that we’ve all already probably discussed to death. So, it would help if I could know in some manner where you’re coming from in order to frame my reply more precisely.

So, reviewers and blog-owners, this question’s for you:

If I know someone or admire someone personally, I think it would be very, very difficult to give an “honest” response to one of their books even if I thought it was consumate crap. And that would be really unfair, wouldn’t it? Honor demands that each book be judged on its own merit and I don’t think that would be at all easy if there’s a personal relationship between author and reviewer. So, reviewers and blog owners, how do you deal with this condundrum? Or is it even a condundrum for you? I really am interested.

Ja(y)nes, I love Dear Author. I think it’s hilarious. And sometimes I’ve bought books because something that was said here about a book, either very good things… or bad things, just wondering if it’s really that bad. Kind of like a Mrs. Giggles thing.

One thing I can say for Dear Author is that I’ve never seen either of you attack the author in a negative review. You’re honest, and the reviews are usually very entertaining.

I’ve probably referred to a few of my books as my baby~like any writer, I do put a lot of time and sweat and love into my stories, a lot like labor. But I’m not going to slit my wrists with a paperclip if somebody doesn’t like my stuff.

For every one person that doesn’t like it, there’s another who does. That’s good enough for me. It strikes me as incredibly arrogant to think that everybody will automatically love every word I write. Plus, it gives me a headache to worry over it. *G* So I try not to.

Visitor hits to the blog/site?

And I’m not being sarcastic there but rather extremely practical in the same way that publishers are practical about what sells and what doesn’t. The plain truth is that if an individual is a good enough at it that they can pull it off consistently, snarkiness and even mean-spiritedness can pay off in hits. And usually a lot more hits than the sweetness and light. They have to be consistently good at it, however, and there’s the rub.

Not all of us would be any good at it if we tried. I know I wouldn’t because it’s not my style. Heck, it’s not even my style to dwell all that much on books I don’t like. So, freedom to be a certain way isn’t the same thing as actually choosing to be that way. Doesn’t change the fact that people are free to be that way, mostly.

And what is lost?

Dare I say nothing at all? Yeah, well, I guess I do dare. Whatdaya know. ;p

Good discussion and I don’t say that lightly.

And good for you also that you accept critique as a part of creating.

In all this discussion of reviewers and discussing books, I believe there is a huge difference in types of critiques. I know I’ve had some fascinating discussions about characters, motivation, plot resolution and whether a character pushed all the right or wrong buttons. In all of these discussions, the writing itself—the author’s “talent” if you will—was never an issue. Actually, I would think these types of discussions would be very satisfying to an author because it means she/he has created something worthy of discussion and passionate feelings. I have had some pretty intense discussions about Ivory’s “Black Silk” and SEP’s “Ain’t She Sweet,” but I hope my deep admiration for both author’s work shows through.

Sometimes, it is the “voice” of an author that does not appeal, and again, I don’t see where an author should worry because this, indeed, is a matter of opinion or taste and sometimes a reader can’t really articulate “why” this is so. I’ve noticed even experienced reviewers have trouble with this one. For example, I admire Jo Beverley’s writing immensley and have enjoyed much of her work, but sometime she exceeds my personal comfort zone in terms of sexual aggression. She shouldn’t worry. That’s her style and that’s my problem, not hers, and I would hope that my trying to explain “why” would be taken as a judgment of her work as a whole because it’s not.

There is another sort of critique that I do think an author should worry a bit about, and I would think that a wise author would at least consider there might be room for improvement and that there’s a need to pay attention to plot and motivation and if it’s an historical, to anachronisms. There’s some pretty pathetic crap being printed these days, and I think one could make a salient argument that it really is more than “opinion”.

You are one of the authors who has obviously been given the “gift” I spoke of. The only other romance authors I can think of off the top of my head who have written so much that is also consistently quality work are Georgette Heyer and Victoria Holt (in all her guises)….You have a wonderful talent, but there are folks out there who may “want” and who may “try” but who will never be able to achieve what you have. Talent really does matter.

I prefer being able to craft the big lie that is (hopefully) entertaining fiction. That’s plenty of stress, but at least–for me–it’s familiar stress.

This is not limited to writers of Romance. It may be that more female writers use this phrase as a book comes out of you, often after a long, laborous process. And the anology is too handy to ignore.

I’ve used it myself. However, I understand perfectly that some may gaze upon `my baby’ and think: Jeez, that’s one ugly kid. They have the right to say so, or to write same in a review–hopefully with specifics.

Neither do I believe in the `if you can’t say something nice’ theory. Nor do I know many on my side of the page who do.

I think what bothers me is that Romance–the genre, the writers (and often the readers) get slammed as a whole for the vocalization or behavior of a few. And the oft-repeated comment that this kind of thing only happens in the Romance genre.

That’s just not true.

Some years back I played for a bit on a screen writer’s board–mainly because they’d gone out of their way to slam Romance–even though those who were, were cheerfully free with the admission they’d never read one and never would. But my point is there was a lot of viciousness there, pettiness, whining when someone criticized their work, snarkiness, and everything you see flogged and blogged in Romance. Just a great deal nastier on every level, imo.

I don’t agree with the opinion that reviews and commentary must be `nice’, or that a reader or reviewer isn’t allowed to express the opinion that some author’s baby desperately needs a cosmetic surgeon. But it irks to so often see Romance writers bundled into one big lump (as if we were one mind with many arms and legs), and the opinion often expressed that we who write in the genre are the only ones who whine or get huffy when our work is negatively reviewed.

I’ve always found it fascinating that so often romance writers refer to their work as “their baby” and follow it with the query, “how would you feel if someone said your baby was ugly?” Well, I’m sure Dr. Frankenstein had to hear a few disparaging words about his creation too, and I can’t believe any author could be silly enough (or arrogant enough) to compare their manuscript to one of God’s works.

About reviews in general and the oft-heard admonition that “if you can’t say anything nice” etc. etc., sorry, but judging art, be it written or visual, has been part of the process of artistic creation since the Greeks. Plays were judged. Prizes were given. In Elizabethan times, actors were pelted with rotten fruit and veggies and theaters were sometimes even burnt if the audience found the play lacking. All of which ought to at least give you a better appreciation of how very restrained Mrs. Giggles is, let alone the two Ja(y)ne’s.

I think it’s ironic that in romance review land, no one ever mentions that some writers ought to perhaps consider alternate employment because some writers simply do not have the native ability to write novels. When I was very young, I desperately wanted to dance. I tried. I really did, but alas whatever glorious combination of genes, body structure, agility, and feel for the music and the moves which created Pablova, I lacked. I’m sure every burgeoning romance author puts a lot of sweat equity into their work and that each wants their work to be loved and appreciated. Ah well, if wishes were horses all beggars would ride. Simply put, a writer needs an ear for language, an imagination combined with enough logic to plot, an insight into what motivates man/woman-kind and relationships, and the patience and/or love to research. Writing is a skill and it can be learned, but writing a novel takes a certain gift. I don’t have that gift, but after reading some books now being published, I’ve often had the thought, “Lord, help me. I could do better than that.” (Not to worry though, I know my limitations and I have my pride.)

Finally, it’s about that sweat equity argument and its cranky sub-argument, “if you think you could do better, then you write etc. etc”. Sorry, but this is a hollow and rather arrogant attitude. I once had a neighbor who spent five years “improving” his property. He worked every night, in all seasons, inside and out. No one could argue that he put a lot of time and money and non-stop work into his house and yard. But alas, when it was time to sale, he had to remove the concrete fish pond, the multi-colored picket fence, the wheel-barrow planter, the pink wall-paper, the Georgia-Pacific paneling, the…….

Of course, the beauty of his place was a matter of “opinion”. So be it, but there’s “opinion” and “opinion” and regrettably no one would confuse his house with Mt. Vernon and no one would buy it until he returned it to classic colonial.

“If this is the best these folks can do, they’re not qualified to write dirty limericks on bathroom walls, let alone movie screenplays.

Buddy, don’t quite your day job. And leave the penis gags to the “South Park” guys, OK?”
From: http://www.splicedonline.com/01reviews/wedplanner.html

And then here’s a bit of collegial commentary about an icon which was first part of a lecture and then became a book:

” All the fun under/ Liberty’s masterful shadow (Here words fail me — few men, few women, and few children have ever written anything as silly, as shamefully silly, as amazingly silly as this) — under the masterful shadow of this line things like the hour of the pageant-master and the poets exploding like bombs look like nothing but ordinary tripe.”

“…complimenting Auden as “a genuinely humane, humanistic writer”: “Auden knows comparatively little about families, about ordinary private lives, anyway; he has had an extraordinary public life himself, and when he talks about these ordinary public lives ordinary human beings have, he is almost always talking down, nature-faking, telling you how Mama Grizzly feels about little Wob, her backward cub.”"

Taken from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/30/AR2005063001420.html

It may be writing one for a book the reviewer disliked is easier, but I don’t see why it should be.

My own experience is that it’s most difficult writing a review for a “meh” book — because how do you say a lot about a book that moved you so little? The easiest book for me to review is that which contains more on the failure side than the success side, because when I read a book with lots of irritating elements, I start keeping conscious track of them as I’m reading, sometimes even underlining out of sheer frustration. Since I’ve already started analyzing before I’m done reading, it’s easier to write a detailed review of a book like this. That being said, few books completely and totally fail for me. When I read a book I love, OTOH, I don’t usually start analyzing until the end, because I’m too busy enjoying myself. So when I have to communicate clearly all the ways I loved the book without simply saying things like “wow, the writing was so good,” I have to spend more time thinking about why something worked for me and communicate that without giving away too much of the book or being too effusively general. Some of the least exciting reviews I’ve read (and likely written) are also the most positive about a book, in part because I think it’s generally more difficult to balance the positive passion one feels toward a great book with the distance that objective analysis creates. That, IMO, is why you often see the most negative reviews as the most passionately written. As an author yourself, though, your experience and your reviews might follow a completely different pattern.

I do agree that leaves the review as open to commentary as the book. It doesn’t appear the Ja(y)nes disagree as there’s a comment section provided.

Snark is, for good or ill, a part of the review process, and has always been. It’s not reserved for Blogworld. There are certainly sites I’ve visited where I’ve found the tone so aggressive or the majority of the posters so obviously ready to revel as they merrily tromp on authors in general, I don’t bother to go back. Not my kind of party.

This has been a useful discussion for me, but then I haven’t wandered in Blogland for long. Like a review, it’s interesting and useful for me to see how others–authors and readers–feel and think about this issue and others.

Lastly, I’ve just written my first review. I’ve heard readers complain that authors don’t do reviews–and that they believe the reason is they’re afraid or shy, let’s say, about being critical of another author’s work. For me, the reason I’ve never done so is because it’s just not what I do. Nothing I was the least interesting in doing. I want to write books, period, leave me the hell alone.

But in this case, Amazon–through my publish–made me an offer I couldn’t refuse. To review Steven King’s upcoming novel. I’m a big fan, a long-time fan, and while I haven’t loved or even liked every single one of his books, I have loved many of them. I read LISEY’S STORY, and not only loved it, but found it bumped its way up to neck-in-neck with THE STAND, my all-time favorite King novel.

And the review was one of the hardest things I’ve ever written. How to relate to the reader the layers of the work, how I felt about it, why I felt what I felt. To put all that down in an articulate, hopefully entertaining and sensible way was damn hard work. It may be writing one for a book the reviewer disliked is easier, but I don’t see why it should be.

So, since yesterday, I have a new level of respect for those who review with some thought of clarity and style–even if they thought my book was crap.

Karen Scott points out that some people make a lot of money being obnoxious and negative in a public forum. And that’s true. Simon Cowell is a great example. In fact, there are many ways of making lots of money that I personally don’t want any part of. If the best you can aspire to is Simon Cowell, there’s little common ground for discussion.

Now, where in my comments did I aspire to be like Simon Cowell? I simply answered your question, by citing examples of people who do gain something from not being sugar-and-spice nice. Apparently, you missed my point. It’s ok, that happens sometimes.

As for having a common ground for discussion, you have a mind, and I have a mind, that’s all the common ground I need. You of course may disagree.

I personally would hope for more from the community of women who write romance, or about romance.

Well I constantly hope for more from women who write romance, but time and time again, I find that I’m disappointed.

As it happens, as per usual, this ‘discussion’ only started going a little crazy, when an author, decided to defend her best friend’s work, from The Bad Reviewer. Within her post, she questioned why anybody would write anything so nasty in a public forum. Never a good idea to do that on somebody else’s blog.

My sense was that this was a useful discussion, but clearly Scott and others don’t think so. They would like me to shut up the same way some authors would like Jane to shut up.

Did you really feel that it was a useful discussion? How was it useful? Have we not had these ‘discussions’ a million times already? Have we learned anything new? Seriously?

Let me summarise for you what happened here over the past couple of days:

Reader posts negative review.
Author’s bestest pal wades in and wags her finger at reviewer
Other Readers object to finger wagging
Other Authors come out and go through the Do’s and Don’ts of Reviewing
More people join in the ‘discussion’, and parrying and thrusting ensues.

Did I miss anything out? Is any of this new? Did we make any inroads in The Great Reviewing Debate? Or did it just turn into a Them Against Us ‘discussion’, again?