Wow…just wow.

The review while through was not insightful.
You offer no constructive criticism about the work and fill the review with your personal opinion instead of detached professionalism.

The review comes off like you have a personal grudge against the author, but I hope I am mistaken. I have read bad reviews (which offer constructive criticism like a professional would do) but nothing like this, its laden in malice. Which gives me the impression that this is beyond you not liking the style of the author, it goes much deeper than that.

I understand that not every cares for a Picasso, but that doesn’t make him less of an artist. I personally dislike the art, but that is my personal opinion and I dont have to offer anything berating just because I happen to not like his art.

And if someone defends the work on this blog why is he ridiculed (are you married to the author) those types of comments make it difficult to take your review seriously.

A professional reviewer in the paper or on T.V. would not stoop to such low levels. I suggest you be a little less impartial next time you review in order to achieve better credibility to your work.

Huitzilopochtli

Thank you so much for writing this review so I won’t have to waste my time reading anything by this author. Just dreadful.

I do not think a review has to be lacking in emotion to be good; in fact, I’d argue it’s the opposite.

No, no, Robin. Don’t you understand?

A reviewer should realise that they are just that, nothing more than a “notice board” to share a book.

Feeling anything other than unalloyed joy is inappropriate to a ‘notice board’. Reviewers should have no emotions at all – after all, they’re not really *qualified* to comment. It’s not like they’re *customers* or anything. They didn’t learn in *school* how to read.

Me, I like a good angry review. Tells me the reviewer is capable of honesty and sharing her honest reactions. Give me that over the sparkly ‘five unicorn poos’ any day.

Rather than bring it back over here, because really, that’s not at the heart of Dr. F’s review, I ranted on my blog. My own little primer on how not to buy into cultural stereotypes and the responsibilities writers have.

I’m going to drag it back here for just a minute, because one of the points of your post is that when authors write about an unfamiliar culture, the respect they seem to hold for that culture can be communicated in their portrayal. I totally agree with this, and I know that as a reader little makes me angrier than the thought that the author has little or not respect for what he or she is writing, whether that be a culture, a sexual orientation, a race, even genre tropes.

Now I understand that this judgment is somewhat of a projection, and that authors will protest up and down that *of course* they respect their work! I would argue that there are certain objective markers of this, despite the very real and very legitimate differences people can have about what constitutes “authentic” representation. But even if it is entirely subjective, it’s a conclusion that — when supported through examples in a review — can fuel a very angry review of a book, a feeling not simply of having one’s time wasted as a reader, but of being disrespected as a reader (regardless of any personal identification with the subject matter at issue).

I disagree strongly with those who insist that an angry review is not professional or acceptable — IMO there is a substantive and substantial difference between a review that is thoughtful and reflective (objective to whatever degree a subjective judgment can be) and a review that lacks emotion or passion about the book and about the task of reviewing. I do not think a review has to be lacking in emotion to be good; in fact, I’d argue it’s the opposite.

I understand that talking about whether an author shows respect for his/her subject seems to push the line past evaluation of the work, but IMO it is still a judgment very much *of the work* because it comes from reading the work and is reflected in how the reader responds to the work. In this sense, a review that addresses these issues is not, IMO, personally directed at the author any more than a review commenting on ungrammatical prose, sloppy plotting, inconsistent characterization, and the like is a personal attack on the author. As long as the reviewer’s reaction is a) grounded in the text, and/or b) explained as a hot button of the reader — as some readers who dislike, say, forced seduction or certain types of characters explain — I think that reader’s reaction is still firmly grounded in and reviewed from the tex as it works in conversation with that particular reader/reviewer.

West, the assumption that someone who’s gay, male or latino can’t give a story a fair shake is rather insulting

That wasn’t what I said, Ann. I was pointing out that I am not a member of the groups who were stereotyped, and I still found the book to be a complete piece of crap. My intention was to cut short any arguments that might be made that only members of those groups would be offended.

Rather than bring it back over here, because really, that’s not at the heart of Dr. F’s review, I ranted on my blog. My own little primer on how not to buy into cultural stereotypes and the responsibilities writers have.

Just my own opinion on the subject.

http://fashionista-35.livejournal.com/458976.html