Monday News: National Book Award Finalists, Jim Hines on Kathleen Hale, Margo Howard v. Vine, and Laurie Penny on the “ramification of misogyny”
Publishing Newsgender / harassment / literary award / Misogyny / negative reviews / Reviewing / stalking33 Comments
Get To Know The Finalists For The 2014 National Book Award – From Anthony Doerr’s All The Light We Cannot See (another WWII-set novel) to Emily St. John Mandel’s Station Eleven to Jacqueline Woodson’s Brown Girl Dreaming, NPR features all of the 2014 National Book Award finalists. There are some interesting books nominated this year – has anyone read any of them? –NPR
Victim or Perpetrator? – A succinct essay from Jim Hines explaining 1) how bad reviews are not tantamount to bullying (and what a terrible injustice we’ve done to kids who truly are bullied by trifling with and diminishing such a powerful word), and 2) how Kathleen Hale is NOT the victim, despite what her prose would like us to believe.
Bad reviews are also a thing. Hating someone’s book is not bullying. Sharing your opinion, suggesting others stay away from a book or an author, is not bullying. It might cost you some sales, and that sucks, but it’s not bullying, nor is it an organized campaign to destroy someone’s career.
Hale’s account does not convince me that she was a victim of online bullying. But even if she was, there comes a point where she crossed a line from victim to perpetrator. She admits to stalking Blythe online. She then began stalking her in real life. She showed up at Blythe’s home, called her on the phone. –Jim Hines
Amazon’s Elite Reviewing Club Sabotaged My Book – Before Kathleen Hale blew up the Internet, Margo Howard had eyes rolling all over social media for her ridiculous piece on how Amazon Vine’s review program perpetrated such a great “injustice” against her and her newly releasing memoir, that she had to contact one member of Amazon’s Board of Directors, who, I can only imagine, practically threw her into the arms of the woman who runs the Vine program. Apparently those who disliked her books are merely envious of her amazing lifestyle. Oh, yessiree. Howard’s Twitter stream extends her diatribe, and notes, among other things, that her editor regrets submitting her book to Vine. I’ll bet.
Well, they were “Vine Voices” I found out. Amazon explains: “Amazon Vine invites the most trusted reviewers on Amazon to post opinions about new and pre-release items to help their fellow customers make informed purchase decisions.” Well, swell. A fellow customer would have read those pre-publication “reviews” and thought the book was dreck—although some people, I have to hope, would have spotted these attacks for what they were: ad hominem attacks. God and Bezos only know how many “trusted reviewers” there are. In any case, these people are given freebies … cold cream, sneakers, pots and pans, and … books! I submit to you that free stuff does not a book reviewer make. One could fairly think of Vine membership as offering an all-you-can-eat buffet of things. –New Republic
WHY WE’RE WINNING: SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIORS AND THE NEW CULTURE WAR – An interesting article by Laurie Penny that attempts to reclaim the social justice warrior description and proclaim those males who suffer from “the rage of bewilderment” as the losers of a cultural war that is sacrificing many individual women but is still effectively diminishing the power of this horrific misogyny. There are a number of elements of Penny’s argument I find compelling (her analysis of the “ramification of misogyny,” for example), but I’m sadly not feeling her confidence that women are winning anything at the moment.
Games and pickup artistry gave a formal structure to that mindset for this generation, but it’s older than that. The gamification of misogyny predates the internet, but right now, in this world full of angry, broken, lost young men convinced that women have robbed them of some fundamental win in life, it’s rampant.
The trouble is that treating other human beings like faceless opponents doesn’t work in the real world.
Gender isn’t a game you can play and win by brutalising and harassing and shaming and hurting the other ‘side.’ Ultimately, there is no other side. Gender oppression is structural. Everybody loses, in the long term, because everybody has to live in a culture where it’s normal to hound women out of their homes for daring to demand fairer treatment, normal to shame girls and queer people into silence for suggesting that there might be other interesting stories to tell. There is no way to win this game, except by not playing at all. –Laurie Penny
Oh wow. I didn’t know that five (FIVE!) Vine reviews are enough to ruin a book. Like, FOREVER. *snort*
I’m so fed up with all this author WTFery. If authors can’t deal with bad reviews without having a major meltdown or even indulging in what borders on criminal behavior, they ought to stay away from Amazon, Goodreads, and all other review sites. Not only does their whining about bad reviews make them seem childish and immature, but their behavior gives *all* authors a bad name, threatens author-reader/reviewer relationships, and, worst of all, makes readers/bloggers/reviewers feel no longer safe to talk about books (and rightly so as we’ve seen from Hale’s example).
I’m a Vine Reviewer, and yep, I’m rolling my eyes. I will ask the same question I had after the Hale piece: who at Howard’s publishing house thought this was a good way to generate publicity?
Vine reviewer here and since most of the other Amazon customers ignore our reviews since they think we are just shills I am too rolling my eyes at her. She’s a mess. I do not need an advanced IQ to read your memoir. Those that read it did not care for it. It was on my list and I passed on it since I thought it sounded horrible.
Jim Hines’ essay was on point of course because no matter how many times it was said that bad reviews are not bullying, apparently it can never be said enough. I doubt that those who think it is bullying could be persuaded though :(. God these people make me angry for devaluing what real victims of bullying go through.
I just wanted to ask all those authors who think that what Hale did is okay because those negative reviewers need to be confronted ( even if it is in their own house!) and silenced. If you made a blogger feel that it is not safe to write a negative review do you seriously think that the alternative is going to be a good review if they like your next book? I promise you that the alternative is no review at all. Would you rather people talk about your books or be silent?
I have to admit to feeling rather scared and nervous. I don’t tweet or facebook. I don’t really review on GR due to their other policies. But I do write negative reviews. Am I endangering my safety or the safety of my family by reviewing?? I’m more than a little upset. If I keep reviewing, do I need to arm myself at all times?? Is someone going to show up at my house one day?
Reviews are for readers. Not to soothe or boost author’s egos. As an author, I’ve gotten reviews I didn’t love. Who hasn’t? But my job isn’t to argue with the reader’s response to my book. My job is to go write another. Taste varies. Everyone is not going to love every book they read. I patiently suggest to authors who can’t handle unfavorable reviews, that you reconsider publishing your work. Once you ask a reader to pay for your book, it’s no longer your secret project, it’s public and a commodity. It’s hard when you’ve worked so hard to hear criticism, but get over it.
And on another note, word of mouth is one of the best ways for books to find an audience. Our community of reader/reviewers and bloggers is an asset. These are people who not only love to read, love books, but are willing to spread the word when they find a book they like. As authors, we should both appreciate their valuable contribution and then leave them alone to do their thing. I hate writing with someone looking over my shoulder, I imagine they feel the same way. To whine and complain is bad enough. But stalking? Scary and so very wrong.
HaperTeen? Harper Collins? The Guardian? Are any of the publishing entities that gave Ms. Hale a platform to speak going to comment on her gleeful pro-stalking piece? How about any of the authors who called the piece “fascinating” as if it was some kind of academic paper and not a real life account of one woman’s deranged quest to feel vindicated? No? Anybody?
Could you keep us up to date if anyone at the publishers or Guardian ever comments on this? Because I’m really disturbed by the fact that all I see (when I’ve searched so far anyway) are articles here and there, and nothing from the people who apparently are – well, I can’t imagine the publicists are ok with this. Why would reviewers ever trust them again with addresses if so?
I’m REALLY disturbed that the Guardian allowed name changes in that, yet kept the name of the reviewer. Granted, I sense that Hale was going to share enough info to out her anyway, but still, it’s a huge slap in the face to have the “names changed” bit except for the one that the article is directed at stalking. It makes us all complicit in it, in that way – and now it’s part of the paper’s permanent internet record.
I read the article, and I’ll admit I found the blogger’s alleged actions mean and borderline creepy (I hate twilight. So I ignore it. I do not hound people that like it). It’s like she was obsessed with hating this book -why????
But the author’s actions went WAY over the line. And the fact that she apparently can’t see that is pretty scary.
You know, when victims of bullying show up at school with guns, no one says “well, they were being bullied! Why are you blaming them???” Sure, we may talk about everything that should have been done before it reached that point, but no one excuses the act of bringing guns to school. Certain actions just aren’t excusable, no matter what the circumstances were. So I cannot understand the people that think it was ok for her to STALK a woman because of “bullying.”
The fact that there are bloggers and reviewers now afraid to post their thoughts on the books they read and either love or dislike, makes me sad. I’m also outraged that Hale decided to use the term ‘bullying’ when defending her actions of stalking. I mean, really? I think everyone involved in this is bat shit crazy, but Hale took it to a whole new level.
So. I read the Jim Hines piece and was following some of the links. His question about why the Guardian would even publish such a piece led to to a livejournal link called barbariene. I’m somewhat disturbed that she likens a bad review (by Blythe of the K.Hale debate) to possible mental illness. Really? If you don’t like a book and write a bad review that the author thinks doesn’t accurately reflect your story then obviously your mentally ill? Perhaps she was taking Hale’s version of what was improper behavior on the part of Blythe. Feeling confused here.
People wondering why Harper/the Guardian are okay with this should check out the links posted in the comments to Jane’s article yesterday. Hale is extremely well-connected in the NYC publishing and journalism worlds.
@harukogirl
If you read accounts by DA and other sites that have gone looking for the evidence, there is nothing to back up Hale’s account that Blythe was harassing people who liked the book.
Funny….went on book in questions gr page, found all 4 and 5 star reviews, looked through their comments…Not ONE had negative comments berating the commenter for liking the book. And the 1 star reviews I read seemed pretty legit -they gave reasons, and didn’t attack the author (well, the ones before this article was released, at least).
It kinda looks like the persecution was all in author’s head, OR that gr deleted it-in which case why the hell did she stalk blogger if it was already taken care of????
@Ros – Do you think that means there will be no response from HC? Not even the usual “the opinions of our writers do not represent the opinions of Harper Collins as an organization” party line? I know her mother or future mother-in-law, the relationship was not clear, is one of the big wigs at Harper Collins, but I really hope they’re not going to wait for this to go away. I’m trying really hard not to pile on (since that sort of thing will only result in more finger-pointing at the original blogger), so I don’t think HC should drop Ms. Hale outright but some response is warranted. Right? I still believe in you, humanity, don’t fail me now!
Of the almost 340 books that I’ve read this year, it’s a toss up between All the Light We Cannot See & The Orenda as to which was my favorite.
,
@harukogirl: You found the blogger’s “alleged actions borderline creepy”–did you read Jane’s account and followed her links? Then you’ll see that the alleged actions are all in the author’s mind.
But even if the reviewer had done ALL that KH alleges, stalking. is. not. okay.
And stalking is NEVER the appropriate response to hurt feelings.
@azteclady – Because I had not yet double checked, that’s why I said “alleged” – as in, it would be creepy IF it were true.
But if you scroll down a few posts, you’ll see my second post where I say that I went to GR myself to look for the reviews in question, and state that it looks like the persecution was all in the Authors head. AND in BOTH posts, I CLEARLY state that the alleged actions STILL DO NOT JUSTIFY the authors actions….so I’m really not sure how exactly you disagree with me….?
Frankly, if a blogger *had* done what this one was accused of, I *would* find it creepy. That is the truth. But because there was no proof given in the Guardian article, I purposely said “alleged,” then looked into it myself and posted a follow saying it appeared false. But – my first statement is still true – I would find it creepy if it had happened.
I found the Margo Howard piece and the comment thread for it hilarious when it posted, but it’s hard to laugh at it today, in the wake of Kathleen Hale’s unrepentant confession to stalking a reviewer. When you combine them with John Grisham’s defending of a friend brought up on child pornography charges, it’s been a hellish week for readers and reviewers.
I have a pretty calm disposition when it comes to internet kerfuffles but I’m angry, sad and scared–not so much for myself (though I took the precaution of removing my address from my Netgalley profile) and more for my friends who review and for our online community.
One thing that struck me only late last night is that Kathleen Hale is the soon to be daughter-in-law of a former prominent theater critic who was known to write critical reviews. Should he be stalked for what Hale considers career-destroying? Was he “a bully”? Or is it only the reviewers she doesn’t know, who don’t have the kind of power that protects and insulates her, who deserve this treatment in her eyes?
One thing I think is telling is this paragraph in the Gawker piece Sunita linked in yesterday’s thread:
@haruko: I responded to your first comment, as I had not read your second comment before I posted mine.
@azteclady: :-)
Ok, am I crazy? I read part of the article KH wrote about being a victim of assault, but “because the recording device malfunctioned, my words were not in the transcript'” WFT??? Aren’t there backups and court typists for things like RAPE trials???
Plus, somehow we are to believe that 1) they let one alleged rape victim be a witness at another alleged rape victims trial? And that after finding the rapist guilty in the one girl’s trial, they never indited him in KH’s case??? HUH???????? Either this was a royally screwed up case, or….?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/19/sexual-assault-trial-justice-kathleen-hale
@Sirius: “I promise you that the alternative is no review at all. Would you rather people talk about your books or be silent?”
I get the impression that many authors labor under the misconception that their book will die a death of a thousand cuts from bad reviews. But the truth is a book dies when people stop talking about it. Even bad reviews can sell books, if only because someone may be curious enough to read what all the ranting is about. Obviously good reviews sell more books, but ultimately no discourse means no sales at all.
There are a number of my FB author friends who sometimes whinge about bad reviews, in particular about Goodreads. My impression is that they just don’t get it; don’t understand that their book is a product like any other, and that once they release it into the wilds of commerce, their “customers” are going to express opinions about the quality of said product. And those opinions won’t always be love, roses and unicorns pooping rainbows.
Snort. In fact, given some of the posts I’ve seen on FB, you’d think GRs was the Mos Eisley of reviewing. “I never go there, it’s just awful,” they say. And I think, “Uh, if you never go there, how do you know it’s so awful?”
Anyway, I review at GR under my author profile (Oh, noes, bad, bad author). I don’t get involved in any of the communities, but I follow and read the reviews of a number of the controversial, supposedly “evil” reviewers. I don’t always agree with them, but I’ve found their reviews helpful in making buying decisions and most importantly, in no way resembling “bullying.”
I was bullied as a child. I’ve had bad reviews of my books as an adult. And I can state, with a high degree of certainty, that a negative review, including one with flashing GIFs and expletives, is NOT bullying.
As I’ve said here before, if you can’t handle negative reviews of your precious little baby, then DON’T read reviews. Any reviews. Easy-peasy, no drama.
@P. Kirby: Totally agree! Also, don’t write about controversial, polarizing topics and then be SHOCKED that someone might not like your book (statutory rape, PTSD, domestic abuse…). With topics like these, even if you have the best intentions and try very very hard to offend anyone ….chances are, you are gonna offend SOMEONE. So get over the fact that not everyone loves your special little snowflake.
#moron
One of my favorite books this year was Rabih Alameddine’s AN UNNECESSARY WOMAN. And Phil Klay wrote this NY TIMES op-ed that I thought was magnificent:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/after-war-a-failure-of-the-imagination.html
It seems like a good list! (It felt important today to say something positive about books and reading. Because what a BS week it was).
Re: Margo Howard and Vine reviews. I used to be a Vine reviewer before we parted ways. A reviewer is offered a selection of items based on their history of prior purchases/reviews. If you’re not a reader, you’re not going to be offered books (at least not initially). There’s a limit on how many items can be selected and reviews must be submitted for most of them (the percentage was increased). I ended up with a lot of books I disliked and/or struggled to finish in a timely manner. I really hate writing bad reviews; I try to find something positive to say even if it’s that the book just wasn’t’t for me but that other readers might feel otherwise. The whole thing was just so unenjoyable that I just quit reviewing for Vine. After several years of inactivity, Amazon sent me a Dear John letter cutting me loose from the program.
My point is that people who reviewed Howard’s book were Amazon customers with a strong history of reading and reviewing other books. They’re readers who selected Howard’s book because they hoped they’d like it, not because they were just dying to do a hatchet job on some poor author. Grow up, Howard.
Sorry! tl;dr
@Janine:
This:
—-One thing that struck me only late last night is that Kathleen Hale is the soon to be daughter-in-law of a former prominent theater critic who was known to write critical reviews. Should he be stalked for what Hale considers career-destroying? Was he “a bully”? —-
Is an excellent question. If Hale weren’t protected by layers of publicists and agents from ever having to answer for her behavior, I would really like an answer to that.
Hey, Ms. Hale! Would it be OK if an actor tracked down your fiancé’s address (perhaps yours also) and came on by? Looked at the items in the front seat of his car? Looked in his windows? Noted his pets and children? Called him repeatedly at work? Stalked him all over the internet and then wrote an article with all the details of the above activities in a major new outlet, making us all complicit with the stalking? Is that cool with you? Because the actor was, say, called out for a wooden performance?
Speaking only for myself, bad reviews do sometimes sell books. I particularly look at one-star reviews for the things I LIKE about stories. Many reviewers will complain about too much foul language in general, or religious swearwords in particular, or sex, or dogs, or cats (okay, a little hyperbole there), and those are things I enjoy. I want to read about people acting like real people, people I know, or could know.
So over the years, I know I’ve bought several dozen books at least in part because of a negative review. I admit, I’m weird.
In regards to the National Book Awards, one of the nominees is from my hometown and a few years back we did a fun local magazine cover together for young writers (not that I’m that young anymore :)) John Corey Whaley’s a talented young man and I’m proud to see someone from my neck of the woods doing well in the world of YA literary fiction. I read his first book, but not this one (his second) yet. The first one (When Things Come Back) won several other awards, so he’s definitely a talent. And, of course, he moved from Shreveport to California as soon as he was able.
Looks like lots of good nominees to fatten the TBR stacks.
I agree about Phil Klay’s article. I would add that Redeployment would make my top 10 for this year.
I honestly think that people are going to justify bad behaviour with whatever reason they think will resonate and give people even the slightest hint of doubt or ability to blame the victim, because we just love to blame the victim. Clearly they did something wrong, because otherwise that would mean that bad things could happen to people who don’t deserve it! That would mean they could happen to ME! And it would mean that maybe I can’t get everything I want if I just scream loud enough! Nopenopenope, head goes in sand.
“It’s okay for me to stalk reviewers because they are bullying me with bad reviews! They’re taking food from my (hypothetical) children’s mouths!”
“It’s okay for me to threaten to kill women who are game devs, because I really like the games they make, but clearly they would have been EVEN BETTER if those evil women hadn’t been involved!”
“It’s okay for me to threaten mass murder of people completely unrelated to this entire thing, because if someone else has an OPINION that might mean they’re not listening to and agreeing with ME! They might TAKE SOMETHING AWAY!”
What it all really says to me is:
“People won’t take my shitty, threatening, or ILLEGAL behaviour seriously because it’s the internet, and because my target is a woman and therefore automatically considered suspect, unreliable and not an actual person, I will always get my way.”
Insert minority of your choice, and you know what? Right now, they’re right.
I actually think that there is a lot of progress being made right now on a whole, and things flaring up isn’t so much losing as it is shining a big freaking light on what has been going on in the shadows since… forever. In every corner, in every industry. Of course, flaring up also sets everything ON FIRE, but maybe some of this needed to be burned to the ground in the first place.
I say this as someone inside the damned fire, too. I am so angry that my friends, my co-workers, that my colleagues are being hurt for simply having jobs that make things that people enjoy. I’m so angry that people daring to have an opinion on things that people enjoy are being threatened when they just want to talk to other people about what they enjoy, as a hobby or as their job. I’m just ANGRY, and I’m angry because I’m tired of being afraid.
I want to start a new website. It will be a “unitasker” website. One page, that says “the undersigned vow to never buy a book by an author who bitches about reviews.”
And then a form for people to sign.
ANONYMOUSLY. Just to piss authors off. But it will keep a tally!
I read her whole “prey” article. Well, I mean tonaly it is really weird, for a victim -very sensationalist. But more than that, it just stuck me as off, but couldn’t figure why. Read it again, multiple times – it didn’t add up. So, I checked the links. Then googled the newspaper articles connected to the case. It still didn’t add up.
First weird-The victims name is never given online- but Hale gives the name of an actual harvard student without blinking. (Googled name -in a Harvard article, circ. 2006. Looked like a lit or arts student, from the article). Could be the actual victim…But if the press went out of their way to never mention her by name…Why did hale give her FULL NAME???
Hale describes spelling her name for the court transcriber, then says later her testimony didn’t make it into the court transcript because “the recorder malfuncted.” So….where did the transcriber run off to? And how convenient that it only malfunctioned for her testimony….in case anyone wanted to track down the transcript.
Hale claims to be at the trial to give “prior” bad acts testimony for “jillans” assult that happened…. TWO YEARS BEFORE HALES. Er…that’s not prior. That’s AFTER.
Unanswered questions: why would you prosecute 2yr old case, but not the 2 month old case?
Why is hales attack mentioned NO WHERE but her own article? There are dozens of articles about purdy attacking the student in 2004 – not a single one mention another incident or witness, with or without names.
Who the hell would believe the bb gun story??? And why are multiple articles online about purdy, but none on an 8- year old child getting SHOT???
If she made up all this stuff…I’d believe she’d make up anything. And this isn’t a subject to leverage for a “good story.”
Personally…I think her essay is another work of fiction.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/19/sexual-assault-trial-justice-kathleen-hale