Rhyanna
http://childrensbookwinp.ning.com/profile/Kressalyne
http://lion_sheart.tripod.com
Keep the Light of Hope Alive, Smile and Pass it on.

I agree that it’s dangerous to try to review and get published at the same time. You risk offending the people whose favor you need to court, and you risk that situation biasing your reviews.

I always try to be polite when I don’t like a book, although there have been two or three exceptions (out of 600 reviews, to put that in perspective) where I loathed a book so much that I was really hard on it. My feelings were just so strong that it wouldn’t have been honest to do otherwise.

I’m rather curious about people’s feelings on positive vs. negative reviews in general—something I blogged about last week. I always try to be very open-minded with respect to the books I read and even try to note when something I don’t like would probably appeal to others. That said, though, for every author who has thanked me for a fair (yet not entirely complementary) review, there’s at least one who has sent me hate mail for daring to dislike even a tiny aspect of an otherwise amazing book that I said wonderful things about.

So yeah, if you are in a position where you have to worry about offending other authors and editors, it might be best not to review. But if you’re polite and honest and open-minded and don’t mind that you’ll inevitably burn a few bridges, then do what you want, even if it’ll make a few people mad.

Janine, I think you're very sweet

That is the absolute truth.

Janine bends over backward to be fair to the authors and the books she reviews.

Janine, I think you’re very sweet–and I don’t mean that in a snotty or snarky way. Sincerely.

Nora

Maybe romance skipped a stage and that left readers (depending on their other fandom experience) with different expectations about how authors interact with fans and other authors– that’s not say that there haven’t been notable feuds. If you have a chance you might pick up Camille Bacon-Smith’s Science Fiction Culture. She’s an academic who has also written some good horror/fantasy.

I just searched and you can find a decent sized chunk of SF Culture on Google Book Search if you feel like sampling it.

A few years ago I wrote a book, a regency-set historical, with my sister. We had a riot writing it together; it was a great experience and brought us closer together. Throughout the process of writing it I worried that my online name would proceed me and I would not be able to get it published with anyone who made the connection between AAR and me. And in the end we didn't publish it, but mostly because it was too long and too complicated and because we, in our ignorance of British legal history, made a blundering plotting error that resulted in a massive rewrite and a happy ending that was perhaps a bit untraditional (it was either that or set course full sail ahead into Historical Inaccuracy waters). We sent out some queries, got a few rejections and one “I'd be glad to read another manuscript from you, but this one is a no.” And because my sister had another baby and I was going through a full course of infertility treatments and another script was not forthcoming, we decided that was good enough. Maybe sometime in the future, another book would be born of our mutual imagination, but we could be grateful for the good that came of this one. Last year I threw it up on Lulu.com just to get it in real book format for my own personal bookshelf. That was kind of neat. Ah, technology…

It sounds like you had a very good experience writing this book, even though it wasn’t published. I think that sometimes the process of writing can be its own reward.

Another salient point was my own speculation that perhaps my skin would be too thin for publication, that in truth I could dish it out but not take it. Who knows? While I don't think the book=baby comparison really works, it's hard not being defensive about anything of your own creation. And writing a book takes hours and hours and hours of yourself. It's very personal.

I agree that, from an emotional standpoint, it’s very hard not to be defensive. But from a logical standpoint, it’s simply not rational to expect only praise and no criticism. The book has not been written that everyone has loved and no one has criticized. Even the Bible gets picked apart by some, and that’s the most venerated book in the western world. It’s tough, I’m not saying it’s not tough, to hear criticism. But it’s also a sign that the book is reaching readers, that it’s making an impact, that it’s ciruclating in the world. Which is what the goal of being published was about, no?

As far as whether writers can review and reviewers can write, I think the combination is possible. Reviewing is writing – thinking about what you're reading, really examining it, and then writing it down, hopefully in an interesting way.

I think that’s an important point. Even a reviewer who isn’t a novelist is still a writer.

Personally, I find it hard NOT to write about books I love or that tweak me in interesting ways. It builds up in my head, what's going on in those pages, and I have to get it out.

Yes, that happens to me as well. I love to discuss books. It’s very hard to shut up about them.

However, as I was in the process of writing, I found it getting harder and harder to read with enjoyment because I would get sidetracked by all these issues of craft to the point at which I found it difficult to get into books because I was looking at everything so critically. I missed reading for enjoyment.

I am lucky, I think, that for the most part I still enjoy books very much. And when I don’t, I can usually judge that from a couple of chapters and then I don’t read further and don’t review those books.

Of course now I have much less time to read or write, and I've had a challenging time finding books that wow me, so I've been less active as a reviewer (Sorry, Jane!). But that may be just temporary. Time will tell.

Like Jane, I hope you will return to reviewing more actively, because I really enjoy your reviews. I think they were a big factor in turning me on to Kathleen Gilles Seidel’s books.

I've been looking for good snarky reviews for months. Can anybody point me in the right direction? It may be that I haven't been blog-hopping as much, just recently, but I haven't seen a snarky romance review for ages. Where are all these legions of Snarky Reviewers hiding?

I don’t blog hop that much so I am probably the wrong person to ask. I sometimes see snarky reviews on Amazon, though.

Nora Roberts,

A year or two ago, I read an interview with an author who snotted all over an established writer in the same genre. He's old and tired, I'm fresh. He doesn't do proper research, and I do. He's crap, basically and I'm gold. I found it so unprofessional, the comments, the slap him down to build me up that I thought: I'll never buy a book you've written, you arrogant asshole.

I have read interviews like that too, and I wonder if perhaps an interview is not the best venue for criticism? For one thing, the author is at the mercy of the interviewer, who may edit their words. If the interviewee says some positive as well as negative things about a fellow author, perhaps only the negative things will end up in the interview. Also, in an interview, the interview subject is asked to talk all about himself, so interviews can make their subjects seem self-centered or navel gazing even when there’s no criticism involved. I imagine that being interviewed by the media is an art onto itself.

DS,

In SF&F, Fantasy, mystery and horror most published reviews I have read are nearly always by author-reviewers- and they also have longevity. I will occasionally refer back to Anthony Boucher's reviews of mystery novels and he died in 1968- I had to look that date up and noticed that he had also been awarded an Edgar for his reviews. I've been trying for a week to find a statement made by Theodore Sturgeon and I keep being distracted by his comments on writing sf although a lot of what he reviewed is long forgotten.

It sounds like you have some wonderful books in your collection. I would love to have an anthology of reviews by romance authors, with each author reviewing a favorite book and explaining why it is a favorite. I think that would be a treasure trove, and it wouldn’t even require anyone to write a negative review.

First, I think the internet makes everything seem more connected than it really is, though certainly there are incidents that plenty of people are aware of and won’t forget. However, I really think publishing comes down to money, and if an editor thinks she can make some from your manuscript, it won’t matter if you’ve slammed every writer in the biz, hither and yon. Unfortunately, not much of this money will make its way back to you, at least not at first, so if you’re writing, you have to do it because you enjoy it tremendously.

A few years ago I wrote a book, a regency-set historical, with my sister. We had a riot writing it together; it was a great experience and brought us closer together. Throughout the process of writing it I worried that my online name would proceed me and I would not be able to get it published with anyone who made the connection between AAR and me. And in the end we didn’t publish it, but mostly because it was too long and too complicated and because we, in our ignorance of British legal history, made a blundering plotting error that resulted in a massive rewrite and a happy ending that was perhaps a bit untraditional (it was either that or set course full sail ahead into Historical Inaccuracy waters). We sent out some queries, got a few rejections and one “I’d be glad to read another manuscript from you, but this one is a no.” And because my sister had another baby and I was going through a full course of infertility treatments and another script was not forthcoming, we decided that was good enough. Maybe sometime in the future, another book would be born of our mutual imagination, but we could be grateful for the good that came of this one. Last year I threw it up on Lulu.com just to get it in real book format for my own personal bookshelf. That was kind of neat. Ah, technology…

Another salient point was my own speculation that perhaps my skin would be too thin for publication, that in truth I could dish it out but not take it. Who knows? While I don’t think the book=baby comparison really works, it’s hard not being defensive about anything of your own creation. And writing a book takes hours and hours and hours of yourself. It’s very personal. Hours more, even, if you make a hideous historical blunder. The daily wage is minuscule. I really believe you have to LOVE doing it to make it worthwhile both from a money standpoint and an artistic one. Especially with historicals. I know there are writers who approach writing like a business and do support themselves, but what they are producing is, in fact, product, not art. Which is fine, but not what I wanted to do.

Getting back on track, I know that for a least one AAR reviewer writing reviews and PPP entries helped her get published; it didn’t hurt her efforts at all. And as for the idea of Romance publishing being like a sorority where you love your sisters, put your all into the house and then get helped up by those that went before you – I think that’s myth. Writing is pretty solitary. Writers may interact with each other socially, in person and online, but there is no Solidarnosc at work. No heaving together for the betterment of the whole. Only individual striving. There may be a handful of authors who could get you elevated or blackballed, but they’re probably too busy to notice one newbie get published. I’m not in RWA, but from what little I’ve heard/observed online, the atmosphere is seldom altruistic.

Basically I think if you have a style that an editor thinks will sell and a little bit of luck, as well as the time put in, you can do it regardless of whether you write reviews online or not.

As far as whether writers can review and reviewers can write, I think the combination is possible. Reviewing is writing – thinking about what you’re reading, really examining it, and then writing it down, hopefully in an interesting way. Personally, I find it hard NOT to write about books I love or that tweak me in interesting ways. It builds up in my head, what’s going on in those pages, and I have to get it out. However, as I was in the process of writing, I found it getting harder and harder to read with enjoyment because I would get sidetracked by all these issues of craft to the point at which I found it difficult to get into books because I was looking at everything so critically. I missed reading for enjoyment. And in the end, I found I valued reading and writing about what I was reading more than coming up with new stories, so that was where I decided to put my time.

Of course now I have much less time to read or write, and I’ve had a challenging time finding books that wow me, so I’ve been less active as a reviewer (Sorry, Jane!). But that may be just temporary. Time will tell.

In any case, good luck with your writing. I’d love to read whatever you’ve done when you’ve done with it.

Best – Rachel

But one difference I have noted is that romance authors are (must be?) prolific. C. J. Cherryh is considered very prolific in the sff arena–she writes approximately two books a year. She also writes a blog about her daily activities that I read religiously although it’s mainly very mundane– skating lessons, allergy attacks and where she and her friends ate dinner. What looks to me like the grueling publication schedule a lot of romance writers have would prevent casual reviewing or criticism (in the literary sense).

I also wonder about the romance publishing schedule because it seems that being able to produce books— not necessarily very good books– is highly prized by romance publishers whereas you don’t hear about it so much in other genres.

True enough, but not actually what I was getting at. Some people are just too sensitive, imo, or too SERIOUS. But there can be problems with author to author critiques–on a much different level than reader to author.

A year or two ago, I read an interview with an author who snotted all over an established writer in the same genre. He’s old and tired, I’m fresh. He doesn’t do proper research, and I do. He’s crap, basically and I’m gold. I found it so unprofessional, the comments, the slap him down to build me up that I thought: I’ll never buy a book you’ve written, you arrogant asshole. This was not Romance, certainly not what I’d call critical review. It was chest beating. And you’d invariably get some of that with author to author review. Human nature rears its head.

I haven’t read that many author to author reviews in Romance. But I have to say from what I have seen, we sure do it better than this jerk did.

The fact is, a lot of authors find it beyond difficult to take any kind of criticism, but when that critique comes from a fellow author, I think that perhaps some of them feel betrayed.

I don't think there is a backlash per se, at least no yet, but more voices are being raised against reviewers that trash books, irrespective of who the reviewer is (author, reader, etc.). Fact is that quite a bit of snarky reviews out there have gone way overboard.

I’ve been looking for good snarky reviews for months. Can anybody point me in the right direction? It may be that I haven’t been blog-hopping as much, just recently, but I haven’t seen a snarky romance review for ages. Where are all these legions of Snarky Reviewers hiding?

Anybody name me more than three SRs in Romanceland?

There’s a lot of interesting discussion going on here that touches on a number of issues–possible conflicts of interest for writer/reviewers, constructive criticism vs. reviewing, the proper role for authors and readers, the good old trash review vs. thoughtful review. Discourse, critical and otherwise, is a tricky thing on the net. What one person intended to say is quite often not how others interpret it. That can be seen even here, and the conversation has been quite rational. But different people definitely see things like “snark” vs. “critique” vs. “Mean Girls” vs. “entertaining writing” differently.

It suggests to me that, yes, entering the reviewing game as a author can be fraught. I think that the reviews of a plain ol’ reader might not be held to the same scrutiny as an author. Your honesty and forthrightness will help you. Hopefully no one will accuse you of agendas or whatnot. Maybe the fact that since you were already known as a reader/reviewer will help protect you. I’m overstating it a bit with the “protect” thing, but I’ve seen some ugly thrown around in the past plus two years. And often the nastiness was based upon comments that I interpreted very differently. To the point where I wondered if I had read the same passage as others.

Keep on keepin’ on. I’ve enjoyed reading your reviews.
Keep on keepi

Losing weight is impossible they shouted.

I’m so sorry that happened to you, Jackie L. But it also goes to show, I think, how irrational people can become in a community that does not allow dissent.

You're absolutely right. In fact, I'm speaking on this topic next month at my local chapter's retreat. Hopefully humorously, springing off the more unusual reader demands I've gotten. This past Christmas a guy wanted to buy me-literally-for his wife, for a day. He really didn't understand why I wasn't for sale, so to speak. It was kinda sweet, and kinda creepy.

Oh. My. God. The mind boggles.

Janine, I don't mind being “called out!” I don't say anything publicly that I won't stand behind! I know it's sometimes risky for an author to have a strong opinion on a public blog, but what the hell? I'm opinionated. Anyone who has met me knows that, LOL!

I appreciate that and also appreciate the opinions you and others have voiced on this topic and on other topics, both here on DA and elsewhere. As you say, it is risky, especially for authors, but sometimes even for readers. But it is also the only way to have a meaningful discussion of anything.

Honestly, I wasn't angry or anything about being quoted. I appreciate your opinion on this topic very much and I was glad I was able to clarify what I meant, because if memory serves, during the original discussion, I wasn't able to make my point very clearly.

I’m glad to hear that.

I appreciate your trepidation here, I really do, but I think you're okay as long as you are as upfront and honest as you were in this post, which I've no doubt you will be. This kind of thoughtful regard for your own career is admirable and I hope you achieve the success you aspire to.

Thanks!

Stephanie Feagan — LOL!

Nora Roberts,

I guess one of my questions is when is it going to be enough? Just how much is a writer supposed to do for the reader? Write the book, keep an informative, easily navigated and updated webpage, blog/don't blog, comment on blogs/don't comment, hold contests, do give-aways, upload free stories, review, discuss.

It seems like a lot. What I'm saying is after a point-which for me is write the book and have the webpage-it's about choice. A writer shouldn't feel obligated or subtly-or overtly-pressured into doing more than her job because some consider it good for the community or interesting to readers.

Those who want to do all or any part of the above, thumbs up. But for those who don't-whatever their reasons-same goes. Thumbs up.

I agree with that and I never meant to imply otherwise with my opinion piece. It’s a personal choice, not an obligation. But in the same way I don’t want authors and writers (myself included) to feel pressured to review, I also don’t want anyone to feel pressured not to do so.