Romance, Historical, Contemporary, Paranormal, Young Adult, Book reviews, industry news, and commentary from a reader's point of view

NYT Bestelling Author, Laurell K Hamilton, Has Officially Lost Her ...

Apparently, Ballantine and Penguin aren’t doing a good enough job with their publicity efforts on Laurell K Hamilton’s behalf. LKH’s assistant, Darla, purportedly posted the following two pictures on MySpace:

Laurell K Hamilton's Bad Ads

Laurell K Hamilton's Bad Ads

I don’t even need to explain how terrible (and wonderful) these are. I pondered many a title for this post:

  • Bam Ruins Anita Blake and Merry Gentry for All Time. (she emailed the dang thing to me).
  • The Number One Marketing Tip for Authors, Both New and Established
  • When Mary Sue Goes Wild

Let’s give thanks to Flo_over at Livejournal who saved these pictures for all time.

Jane Litte is the founder of Dear Author, a lawyer, and a lover of pencil skirts. She spends her downtime reading romances and writing about them. Her TBR pile is much larger than the one shown in the picture and not as pretty. You can reach Jane by email at jane @ dearauthor dot com

73 Comments

  1. Robin
    May 15, 2007 @ 21:04:16

    Okay, so maybe no one should ask the LA Times to review LKH’s books. And she’s not even considered Romance, but sadly, this is exactly the kind of thing that would get ten times the circulation of, say, a Deborah Smith novel, and would invariably be used to denigrate a genre LKH write. But hey, there’s sex so it must be Romance, right?

    ReplyReply

  2. Robin
    May 15, 2007 @ 21:05:26

    Argh, I meant, “…and would invariably be used to denigrate a genre LKH doesn’t even write.”

    ReplyReply

  3. Jane
    May 15, 2007 @ 21:06:21

    I HATE (with the heat of thousand suns) that LKH is considered ROMANCE because it is so far from being romance as to actually be the polar opposite.

    ReplyReply

  4. bettie
    May 15, 2007 @ 21:39:06

    But hey, there's sex so it must be Romance, right?

    There’s sex and it’s written by a woman. Pulpy books with sex and violence written by men tend to end up as quasi classics – witness Mickey Spillane and Ian Flemming. Which is not to say I think LKH is a comparable writer. Spillane’s and Flemming’s books have plots whereas recent works in LKH’s oeuvre seem to consist of clusterf*cks interrupted by chapter headers.

    ReplyReply

  5. Gennita Low
    May 15, 2007 @ 22:12:40

    Okay, I got to ask. Is that her husband’s feet on one side and her bodyguard’s on the other? I’m going to be in so much trouble for even wondering….

    ReplyReply

  6. Gennita Low
    May 15, 2007 @ 22:16:36

    Sigh…pardon the grammar. ARE THOSE her husband’s feet….

    ReplyReply

  7. bam
    May 15, 2007 @ 22:23:53

    Goddamn it, jane, I’m still laughing and it’s FOUR HOURS LATER!

    Man, I love Flo.

    ReplyReply

  8. bam
    May 15, 2007 @ 22:25:12

    ARE THOSE her husband's feet on one side and her bodyguard's on the other? I'm going to be in so much trouble for even wondering….

    I think they’re Jon and Darla’s.

    *dies laughing*

    *wiping tears away*

    ReplyReply

  9. Teddy Pig
    May 15, 2007 @ 22:26:50

    Being born in Oregon I can accurately say that the term “White Trash” may not fully cover this in case of flooding. I would suggest a rider would be in order.

    Oh look she already has two…

    Mr. Springer your on in 5 4 3 2…

    ReplyReply

  10. Shiloh Walker
    May 15, 2007 @ 22:39:28

    hmmmmm… interesting…

    ReplyReply

  11. Karmyn
    May 15, 2007 @ 23:06:50

    I’ve known for quite some time that the woman is crazy. Not just ‘writer eccentric’, but Anne Rice style insanity. This just makes it that much clearer. I am so glad I stopped reading her a long time ago and have sold all the books I ever had of hers. The words fugly and hack come to mind.

    ReplyReply

  12. December Quinn
    May 15, 2007 @ 23:44:37

    Dude, that is ate up.

    What is that thing standing at the back in the bottom picture? Is that a feminine man or a masculine woman? Does LKH plan to put a Latin transvestite in her next book for Anita to do, and this is a TINTI11ATING CLUE11!!1 about TEH NEXT HAWT BOOKE?

    (Okay, I feel the need to explain that “tintillating” is a deliberate misspelling.)

    Boy, I know I’d be scared if some pasty, chubby middle-aged folk dressed in black Mom jeans came walking toward me.

    ReplyReply

  13. bettie
    May 15, 2007 @ 23:45:28

    Looking at those pictures I can’t help but think of all the authors who have said, “My main character is not me. I write fiction.” I really, really, really wish LKH was one of them.

    Oh, who am I kidding. This train wreck was good enough to distract me from TV during sweeps.

    ReplyReply

  14. Sheila.
    May 16, 2007 @ 00:54:24

    Borders Books and Music was/is the only place to properly have LKH in Horror. Where she belongs. During my three year stint there as a bookseller/spt clerk I have never seen her books in Romance.

    Now when she participated in a Romance anthology that’s different. MaryJanice Davidson, Sherrilyn Kenyon, Maggie Shayne, Rebecca York, & Eileen Wilks are ROMANCE. LKH is not. I have no idea why Penguin/Jove/Berkeley insist on putting that woman’s ‘short stories’ *another bitch fest right there* in with those other authors that write ROMANCE.

    ReplyReply

  15. Alex
    May 16, 2007 @ 03:26:33

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Can’t…stop…laughing…

    ReplyReply

  16. Sarah McCarty
    May 16, 2007 @ 04:17:38

    I could go into a lot of questions, but I read all the entries here and at Flos that explain pretty much everything these photos potentially represent from the books except one. Who is this Darla everyone is speculating about?

    ReplyReply

  17. Flo_over
    May 16, 2007 @ 04:58:47

    I snagged these from some friends who saw the thread on her site before it was snatched down. And all I have to say is… it was FAR better when I took the feet one into MSPaint and made some toe tags.

    And she wonders WHY people make a correlation between her writing and her personal life… I WONDER?

    Also someone mentioned that this might have all been a glorious publicity stunt seeing as how she’s gotten some bad juju at amazon.com and how her newest “offering” (I almost typed offal…) is soon to be released. But alas, I think that company believes these are “stylin’”.

    *sporks self in eye*

    ReplyReply

  18. Sarah Frantz
    May 16, 2007 @ 05:20:27

    I can’t believe I know this, Sarah McCarty — I plead the fact that I don’t read her anymore. Darla is her secretary/Girl Friday. She’s the one behind LKH in the second picture. Jon (or Jonathan?) is her husband, on the left (to LKH’s right, but our left) with the long hair. Second husband. The guy on the right is their best friend….wait for it….Richard. Whose is emphatically NOT in a menage with her and Jon. Not. Really. She promises.

    I haven’t read the last few, thank God. I’m done. I haven’t even had the urge to check it out. Rumor has it Anita’s going to do Edward in the next book (who was nicely domesticated in the last book he was in). I just don’t want to even think about that, so I’m done done done.

    ReplyReply

  19. Sarah Frantz
    May 16, 2007 @ 05:22:17

    And as I said at Flo’s site — that woman cannot hold a sidearm to save herself, and I’d be terrified to be in the same room with her and a loose firearm. God help us all. If she’s trying to be Anita, she just showed how much she failed.

    ReplyReply

  20. Keishon
    May 16, 2007 @ 05:30:25

    WTF, I needed a good laugh to start off my day…thanks. She has lost her ever loving mind…utterly ridiculous.

    ReplyReply

  21. Kristie(J)
    May 16, 2007 @ 05:33:47

    Good lord!!! Now I can proudly say I’ve never read Anita Blake. Who would want to read such a bat shit author like that?

    (and no offense is meant towards all those former fans who used to love her books before she turned strangely wierd)

    Where I live thank heavens she isn’t marketed in the Romance section so she can’t give the genre a bad name around here.

    ReplyReply

  22. jmc
    May 16, 2007 @ 05:48:25

    What the hell is going on with the hair of the dude on the right in the bottom photo? Looks flaming. Are there gay men (other than Asher & Jean Claude) in Anita’s harem? Is that who he’s supposed to be?

    And readers of LKH (which I no longer am) are supposed to believe that Anita isn’t a Mary Sue version of LKH? After seeing these lame photos?

    I need to go bleach my eyes now, thankyouverymuch.

    ReplyReply

  23. Elizabeth
    May 16, 2007 @ 06:15:20

    Oh…my. This is…gosh.

    Hey, can anyone explain the term “Mary Sue”? I’m not familiar.

    ReplyReply

  24. Kerry Allen
    May 16, 2007 @ 06:22:02

    What a relief to finally know it’s the publisher’s poor promotional efforts keeping me away rather than the writing that has devolved to primordial sludge, as I had previously erroneously believed.

    And that second pic really does look like a Jerry Springer episode waiting to happen. Alternate caption: “Buy my book, or I’ll shoot Richard in the knee.”

    ReplyReply

  25. December Quinn
    May 16, 2007 @ 06:25:54

    The thing is her PA? That poor girl.

    ReplyReply

  26. December Quinn
    May 16, 2007 @ 06:28:24

    And on closer inspection, it appears her PA has no lower body at all. Seriously. Look.

    ReplyReply

  27. Bev(BB)
    May 16, 2007 @ 06:34:04

    Doesn’t the one in the back have a gun aimed at the head of the second guy? Me thinks I’d want to leave the room, personally. Get far, far away from the others.

    Sheesh.

    ReplyReply

  28. Jane
    May 16, 2007 @ 06:34:30

    I thought Richard was her ex-husband? She has a new Richard? That is her bodyguard? I know that Jon is supposed to be Micah, but where is Jason, et al. Hee. This is a 8 bazillion sides of fun. Bam, when will be writing some cover snark? You definitely need to think up Blurbs to go with these pictures.

    ReplyReply

  29. Darlene Marshall
    May 16, 2007 @ 07:16:46

    I love the “When Mary Sue Goes Wild” tag.

    ReplyReply

  30. Barbara B.
    May 16, 2007 @ 07:16:52

    Simply ghastly. I’m reminded of the phrase ‘fish belly white.’

    They look like something out of Edgar Allan Poe. Or the mind of Charles Addams.

    ReplyReply

  31. Leigh Ellwood
    May 16, 2007 @ 07:27:13

    Elizabeth: “Mary Sue” is a term used often in fan fiction to describe a character based on the writer. She is written usually to have the hero of the story fall madly in love with her. If you Google “Mary Sue” and “fan fiction” you will find a wealth of information.

    I’ve not read LKH so I can’t comment if her work is Mary Sue-ish.

    ReplyReply

  32. Elaine
    May 16, 2007 @ 07:34:11

    The term Mary Sue came out of media fan fiction and came from a type of story in which the protagonist is a thinly glossed version of the author who gets to interact with her favorite characters, who absolutely adore her.

    Mary Sue

    ReplyReply

  33. kardis
    May 16, 2007 @ 07:45:41

    Her ex-husband’s name was Gary, not Richard. And if I were’nt already convinced woman was nuts these would do it! Thanks for the laugh!

    ReplyReply

  34. bam
    May 16, 2007 @ 08:31:01

    From Wikipedia, a Mary Sue is:

    the character in question acts as a wish-fulfillment fantasy for the author who created it

    [...]

    Exactly what makes a character a Mary Sue is subjective, although commonly accepted criteria include the character being exceptionally lucky (romance, adventure, and popularity with the right people seeming to gravitate toward the character) and having a role in the story that upstages the other characters. Some believe that if a character is unusual or remarkable in some way, then the character will immediately be perceived as a Mary Sue. Others agree that “Sue traits” are cumulative; most characters have “Sue traits” to some degree, but it’s how much and how they are handled that is the real determining factor. Some would say that there is a single, abstract defining characteristic of a Mary Sue; roughly, that the author is on the character’s side, and that the world around them reacts to the character based more on this than any realism.

    Bam, when will you be writing some cover snark? You definitely need to think up Blurbs to go with these pictures.

    No, Jane… just… no. I believe that’s a very dark and horrid place. I don’t think I can go there and ever return.

    ReplyReply

  35. Elizabeth
    May 16, 2007 @ 10:03:38

    [quote comment="28418"]The term Mary Sue came out of media fan fiction and came from a type of story in which the protagonist is a thinly glossed version of the author who gets to interact with her favorite characters, who absolutely adore her.

    Mary Sue[/quote]

    Ah. I see. Yes, that does seem to fit. Thanks Leigh Ellwood, Elaine and Bam.

    ReplyReply

  36. Kathryn S
    May 16, 2007 @ 11:00:45

    I’m not going to comment on LKH, but damn I loved those early Anita books. The first four or five were great reads.

    ReplyReply

  37. HelenKay
    May 16, 2007 @ 12:13:04

    Well, damn. Guess I have to re-think my promo plan for my next book. I had the big bed photo all ready to go…

    ReplyReply

  38. Robin
    May 16, 2007 @ 12:19:37

    And she wonders WHY people make a correlation between her writing and her personal life… I WONDER?

    Does she wonder? Because the few times I’ve visited her blog, it’s seemed that not only is she comfortable with blurring the lines, but that she actively does so. The posts I’ve read fluctuate easily between her writing and her real life, as if it’s all part of one master Opus d’LKH. Which, of course, is her choice to make. But at the most casual level, it does appear to be a choice she’s making, simply by presenting her work and her life together the way she does. With some author blogs, there’s a clear sense of separation, even as an author talks about work sometimes and life sometimes. But on LKH’s blog, those distinctions are not particularly apparent to me, so I assumed the blurring was happening on purpose.

    ReplyReply

  39. Jane
    May 16, 2007 @ 12:23:21

    I don’t think she gets it because she excoriates people for speculating on what goes on in her personal life. There was a big post about that on her blog a while back – maybe a year ago. She HATES it when asked whether she has been inspired by real life. I shall have to go find those posts.

    She does blur the lines and these photos are perfect examples. You can’t tell me she doesn’t have the money to pay for an ad shoot that doesn’t include her, her husband, her assistant and her other lackey. By putting themselves in this picture, you are asking the reader to insert these people in the books.

    ReplyReply

  40. Robin
    May 16, 2007 @ 12:44:22

    She does blur the lines and these photos are perfect examples. You can't tell me she doesn't have the money to pay for an ad shoot that doesn't include her, her husband, her assistant and her other lackey. By putting themselves in this picture, you are asking the reader to insert these people in the books.

    Okay, so IMO that means either that a) she’s disingenuous when she wonders why people wonder, b) she has a serious lack of self-awareness and self-consciousness, or c) a certain level of, well, arrogance, maybe, whereby she feels that she can blur the boundaries all she wants but no one else can. Which, ideally speaking, might be true, but totally unrealistic and perhaps a little manipulative, since she’s clearly trying to *sell* her books by putting herself out there into the blogosphere and into photos personally. This goes wayyyyy beyond a book cover shot (even though some of those give me the willies, too).

    ReplyReply

  41. Devon
    May 16, 2007 @ 13:59:38

    This brings tears to my eyes. Tears!

    I really think, after reading some of her blog post, and stuff on her old MB etc., that she has an insane lack of self-awareness, as well as delusions of grandeur. Then again, I’ve never taken a psychology class in my life.

    But dammit, I love the crazy! Woman thinks she’s a creative genius!

    At least it’s not sepia-toned, and they’re not wearing”olden-times” clothes.

    ReplyReply

  42. bam
    May 16, 2007 @ 14:34:15

    As my friend Ann has said, “I’m thinking she should dress up all the way like Anita with jeans, red socks, matching polo shirt, matching stripe on her Nikes, and what’s that? Oh yes. The fanny pack! Then she’ll be ready to kick some tail.”

    AND WHERE’S THE PENGUIN?!?!

    ReplyReply

  43. ClosetNerd
    May 16, 2007 @ 16:41:13

    I am surprised that there isn’t an obscene bulge in her husband Micah/Jon’s trousers, given the repeated references (and I have skipped the last several books) to his freakishly large penis. If she is going to bother with the gun props, why not stick a tire iron down the front of his jeans or something?

    ReplyReply

  44. CJ
    May 16, 2007 @ 18:50:42

    You know, when I first discovered LKH’s books, wow, they made me love reading in a way I hadn’t since like sixth grade. I mean, it was love, maybe into book 9. And I still feel sort of intense loyalty to her. I owe her a ton, as a reader and a writer. What I think we may be seeing here, however, is a Michael Jackson type phenomenon where freakishly worshipful fans have addled a writer’s self image with too much slavish slobbering. Have you ever seen the forum parts of her website? They really frightened me when I looked, as a newbie to the whole genre. I was like, who are these people? There is no sanity here. And everybody thinks they’re a sexy vampire or something! Anyway, gees.

    ReplyReply

  45. jcm
    May 16, 2007 @ 18:59:44

    The one in the back is a chick?

    Holy crap.

    ReplyReply

  46. Josie
    May 16, 2007 @ 19:15:52

    That is just bizarre for so many reasons. LKH is living in a fantasy land and those pictures are about as cool as seeing my mum and dad dressed up in Anita Blake costume. Hmmm, on second thoughts… Nah, not cool.
    You know who got the character promo photo right? Nora in her Eve Dallas trench. Loved it.

    ReplyReply

  47. Carrie
    May 17, 2007 @ 05:44:44

    Oh…my. I used to work at a bookstore, and met Laurell and her entourage a few times when they came through for book signings. They were always very, very nice to us (much more so than some other authors I could name), but also very strange. I kind of like strange. The world would be a boring place without people to do kooky stuff like this.

    I always got the impression that Laurell and co. were the ultimate geeks who, by some stroke of luck, found popularity. And it’s gone straight to their heads. But still, like I said, better this than boring.

    ReplyReply

  48. CJ
    May 17, 2007 @ 11:48:53

    You know, I agree, Carrie, and I’ve been feeling a little bad about comparing LKH to Micheal Jackson–that is an extreme example, and this is just a dorky thing her assistant did. And really, LKH is a trailblazer and trailblazers take risks and do exuberant, sometimes wacky things. That is what’s great about them.

    ReplyReply

  49. Edie Ramer - Author
    May 19, 2007 @ 18:54:43

    [...] to a writing friend, and I thought other people might be interested too. Dear Author posted pics of Laurell K. Hamilton and friends that a lot of people thought were way out of line, and I thought were funny. It’s nothing [...]

  50. Nicolette Rivers
    May 19, 2007 @ 22:48:24

    I think they all are slightly to severely crazy, still some of the above comments are brutal. Personal comments on looks? Not nice!

    Agree Ms. Roberts knows how to do a promo picture!

    ReplyReply

  51. Marty Myers
    May 21, 2007 @ 13:57:58

    I used to be a big fan of LKH, I enjoyed the first 6 or seven books, etc. but after joining her website forum and continuing to read thru the series as more and more sex crowded out more and more plot and more and more grammer and spelling mistakes crept into the books I lost interest and as fanatical fans on her board and her fanatical assistant Darla began attacking anyone on there who didnt display slavoring devotion to LKH I ended up distancing myself from her books. These ridiculous pictures do not surprise me much, they just reinforce Laurrell and companies amaturish and wierd sense of taste and style.

    ReplyReply

  52. john
    Jul 01, 2007 @ 07:36:18

    Used to like the ABVH series. Tough chick, half-latin (my wife’s a latina, FWIW), knew her way around a fight, yadda yadda.

    Loved Edward (in an ‘if-i-were-a-sociopath-he’s-my-idol) kind of way. Had weapons for every occasion. He’d bring a flamethrower to the party (always a plus). Didn’t have the problem w/Edward ‘going native’ in OB that some had; just made him human in my mind, i.e., fallible.

    But folks, let me just say this about these pics…

    This $#!+ sucks. I’m an artist, and I do photo retouching and manipulation all the time. That second pic is so rotten, it should be dissolving. No shadow from the (obviously) inserted throne, the femme-guy with the AK seems to have lost part of his right leg, the manly gal in the background is half-missing (and ugly, but that’s hard to help; still they could have done SOMETHING). LKH looks like some biker grandma on a rampage (sorry, my wife’s ten years older and looks five years younger – how’s THAT work?). None of them look particularly comfortable with the weapons they’re holding.

    Sigh.

    And, for what it’s worth, I don’t even like the typeface.

    ReplyReply

  53. Claire
    Jul 02, 2007 @ 10:00:00

    Okay, someone has to say it. The lousy pictures have been critiqued but no one has pointed out that in the first photo it should be “Get into bed� not “Get in to bed.� In regards to the second photo, only Anita was called, “ma petite,� (since it isn't a proper noun it isn't capitalized). And how did one person become a “we�? Also, why does being called “ma petite� force anyone to kick someone else's ass? The logic isn't there. And what kind of writer would write this drivel, or permit it to be posted?

    A few years ago, I visited LKHs website and saw some of the pictures from her wedding to her current husband. At first they shocked me because they were dressed in costume but then I thought, “Well, a lot of people belong to the Society for Creative Anachronism and like to dress in period clothing.� There are plenty of people who dress up for parties and conventions so no big deal. Right?

    However, over time, I've come to realize that there is a difference between let's pretend for a day and wanting something that isn't real to be real so badly that you lose sight of reality. I wish LKH well. Literally ;-)

    Anyone can imagine a fantasy world and we appreciate authors who can share their visions with us. The really good writers make these worlds seem real. And even though we know that they are not real worlds, we come to know and love these worlds and the people who inhabit them as if they were real and we had been there. But the majority of us know the difference. It is this small percentage who gets lost in fantasy that one needs to worry about. Really worried. Really, really worried.

    ReplyReply

  54. Christina
    Aug 09, 2007 @ 11:54:55

    If you’re going to pose in a bed like that, write your Mary Sue as a woman who every single man in your endless series of porn wants to sleep with, overshare about how sexual you are and how much you just love sex and claim to have done every sexual thing your character’s done, you’re putting that out there and I think you can expect some harsh comments about your looks. Frankly, it just highlights the difference between her image of herself and the reality. She’s not someone like Jessica Simpson, who can use her body or sexy image to boost her career, and she’s not in that type of business, so she shouldn’t be trying. She’s an author. It shouldn’t be about that.
    As far as where her books are shelved – as a horror fan, it’s always pissed me off that my local stores shelve her stuff in horror. I always thought they should be in romance. I guess they’re not very romantic, but they are nothing but (badly-written) sex. There’s nothing to put them in the horror category except the supernatural elements. They’re supernatural erotica, I guess.

    ReplyReply

  55. Marie
    Aug 13, 2007 @ 11:21:20

    “Her ex-husband's name was Gary, not Richard. And if I were'nt already convinced woman was nuts these would do it! Thanks for the laugh!”

    Her ex-husband’s name is Gary, but LKH herself has stated that Richard is based on Gary, not named after him.

    ReplyReply

  56. Chrissy
    Aug 23, 2007 @ 01:52:50

    Ummm…

    Well, on one level, I’m relieved to know Darla isn’t her writing as a fake person defending herself. Err.

    On another level…

    Sweet. Suffering. Cupcakes.

    Somebody slip those people a quad of mickeys before they do something baaaaaaaad for Geraldo and O’Reilly to flip out over for about 6 weeks.

    Make it stooop! MAKE IT STOOOOP!

    ReplyReply

  57. lauriestrode
    Aug 25, 2007 @ 12:12:49

    ““Her ex-husband's name was Gary, not Richard. And if I were'nt already convinced woman was nuts these would do it! Thanks for the laugh!â€?”

    “Her ex-husband's name is Gary, but LKH herself has stated that Richard is based on Gary, not named after him.”

    In her blog LKH often refers to one of their friends whose name is Richard, so the mistake is quite understandable – But the fourth guy in the picture is not said Richard but their bodyguard Charles aka Gru, who is now a regular part of the LKH entourage.
    In reference to Ma Petite: In this case I think it refers to the fact, that Laurell’s business is called Ma Petite Enterprise, which sort of explains the use of plural in the text.

    ReplyReply

  58. MEGAN (AUSTRALIA)
    Mar 06, 2008 @ 01:32:43

    A)does she realy need a body guard?

    B)sometimes a “respectful distance” between author and audience should go both ways. Let’s preserve the mystery a little, huh?

    C)there is a time and a place for amateur and for professional – this is one of them.

    D)*sigh* now I know how a mother feels when a child falls down and goes boom (its the only way they’ll learn)

    E)no wonder richard is such a annoying character (mary sue’s revenge)

    F)Ive read better sex scenes in fanfiction (seriously!)

    Finally – gotta love those weirdos, without them there’d be no nuts in the healthy, fruity muesli (granola for yanks) that is life.

    ReplyReply

  59. morriganscrow
    Apr 12, 2008 @ 08:10:19

    Ummm…wow….

    The first one is crying out for the addition of toe tags, while nothing short of a complete blackout would help the second.
    Mind you, having seen the “quality” of the merchandise offered on her website, I’m not the slightest bit surprised by the tackiness of these pics.

    ReplyReply

  60. Smakitten
    Apr 01, 2009 @ 06:49:49

    O……..M……..G…

    *moment of silence* followed by hysterical laughter! Seriously, I’m literally giggling as I type this!

    First off I can never read an AB book again, as Anita and her harem will forever look like the group shot. Such a shame (not)

    Secondly, I’m photographer and I swear to god I’ve seen 13 year old emo kids do a better job on their myspace pics with photoshop then the tack-o-rama on display above!

    Thirdly are they actual humans in the photos, the one at the back looks like a dwarf and/or hobbit.

    It really goes to show the sad state of affairs her promo team is having if this is the best promo material they can come up with!!

    ReplyReply

  61. Jovet
    Apr 30, 2009 @ 13:43:33

    Now, I decided a long time ago I was finished with LKH… her descent into self-indulgnt insanity ruined one of my favorite series. As far as I’m concerned, Anita’s plane went down as she was heading home in OB… I can still think fondly of the series.

    Still, I find myself rabidly curious to watch LKH make her life one continuous train wreck after another. And these photos… god. The woman needs help.

    ReplyReply

  62. Stephanie
    Aug 12, 2009 @ 12:55:24

    How did anyone think these pictures were good enough to be used as a promotional tool? Also, for all the money LKH makes off those books, one would think she could hire a decent photographer to take these shots. This looks like cosplay. Poorly done cosplay at that.

    ReplyReply

  63. stacey
    Oct 04, 2009 @ 16:34:09

    Wow I am speechless….

    ReplyReply

  64. Tracy
    Dec 04, 2009 @ 13:04:08

    The only thing missing in the last pic is her daughter Trinity laying underfoot (literally). Her descent into complete narcissism has rendered her daughter motherless as you can tell from her blogs and twitter feed. She clearly resents and despises having to “feed Trinity” (what is she, a dog?) and/or mother her in any way. She actually boasts about her neglect in one twitter post stating she didn’t make it to Trinity’s choir performance because she spent so much time getting dressed. This post was followed with a link to a picture of her in the outfit, hair and make-up she took oh so much time to do. I will just say, the photo was actually worse than the above and I am sure when Trinity saw her, she was thankful mom missed the performance. Needless to say, LKH is officially a female douche bag. A total TOOL.

    ReplyReply

  65. Writings Of A Wicked Book Addict – WLP Wants To Know
    Jan 21, 2010 @ 12:54:42

    [...] head, but to become the character……case in point, read some of the comments on this post over at Dear Author from 2007. I know I am going to take some heat from the die-hard Anita fans, and thats fine. Just [...]

  66. Tweets that mention NYT Bestelling Author, Laurell K Hamilton, Has Officially Lost Her Mind | Dear Author: Romance Novel Reviews, Industry News, and Commentary -- Topsy.com
    Jan 21, 2010 @ 12:55:16

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by kindlevixen, Natasha. Natasha said: RT @kindlevixen: I am still cracking up at the comments on this blog post. http://bit.ly/8j8m90 (oh check my blog LOL) [...]

  67. p. malygris
    Feb 25, 2010 @ 14:54:43

    @bettie:

    well I’m sorry to admit it, but many of us lo-brows enjoy cluster fks. If she gets out of the bed once in a while an blows someone away, even better. :)

    It’s just a book. It doesn’t have to be the single best life defining read of my spurious existance.

    mal

    ReplyReply

  68. mike barber
    May 30, 2010 @ 11:22:56

    I loved the early books. Lunatic Cafe and Circus of the Damned, but somewhere along the line these became soft porn and lost my interest.

    ReplyReply

  69. Haven
    Feb 22, 2011 @ 22:15:03

    The comments about her daughter and her mothering are3 WAY THE FREAKING HELL, out of line. Critique the books if you like, leave the kid alone.

    ReplyReply

  70. darlene
    Jun 12, 2011 @ 18:34:16

    enough is enough is enough, what started as an enjoyable series has sunk to poorly written porn. LH should take the handcuffs off of the bedpost and go back to writing

    ReplyReply

  71. Joanne
    Nov 02, 2011 @ 08:18:36

    Enough, all these pictures prove is that she has a wicked sense of humor…the rest of you can just grow up. If you don’t like the sex scenes then don’t read the book…there is no need to slam her personally or professionally….GROW UP!!! I like her books, they do exactly what they are supposed to ..distract you from the mundane world that we all deal with from day to day.

    ReplyReply

  72. Anne
    Nov 04, 2011 @ 13:17:18

    Perhaps she attempted this stunt in 2007 because of her declining sales? If so, it didn’t work. Her sales have continued to drop.

    http://satireknight.wikispaces.com/file/view/LKHsalesgraph.jpg/231237862/LKHsalesgraph.jpg

    ReplyReply

  73. Antonia
    Apr 25, 2013 @ 15:42:22

    @Barbara B.:

    I don’t mind that you don’t care for the author, her works, or the photos. But I would point out that your denigration of her/their skin color is no more appropriate than it would be if they were some shade of brown you didn’t care for.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

%d bloggers like this: