Pity for authors

[Prefx]

I've been going through Amazon reviews recently to gage some views on popular fantasy novels, and coming out of it I've gained some sympathy for all authors. People are cruel, vicious, and a lot of times stupid with their comments. For an example, reviewers are attacking the instances of sex and deaths in George Martin's works. Uh - yeah, last I checked, realism is what his series is based off of.

Reversely, I read a review about LOTR being tripe and cliche. *Smacks forehead.*

Perhaps we as readers need to show more care for authors and the months they spend creating their work. I just can't fathom what it's like to have your "baby" criticized in a way that makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Lobolover]

I more pity author's whose work no one ever mentions or discus.Miss Eleanor M. Ingram or Gertrude Barrows Bennet for instance .The Thing from the Lake and Claimed! respectfully were one of the best weird books ever writen,but they never get mentioned or discused anywhere.Same with W.C.Morrow and the list could go on and on and on.

 

[Shoegaze99]

For an example, reviewers are attacking the instances of sex and deaths in George Martin's works. Uh - yeah, last I checked, realism is what his series is based off of.

If those are elements they don't like in Martin's book, why wouldn't they criticize them? These folks are entitled to their opinion on such subject matter, aren't they?

I don't think that Martin intends to have graphic sex and violence insulates said material from being cited in criticism. It just means that the material clearly isn't for the reviewer.

Nothing wrong with that.

I'm really not a fan of people eating poo, so seeing people eat poo in Pink Flamingos is going to be one of the shocking and disgusting things I mention when I say what I don't like about the film. That John Waters intended it to be shocking and disgusting does not somehow render my viewpoint irrelevant or stupid. He wanted shocking and disgusting. I didn't like it. Should I not say so?

I do not pity authors. Most of them, at least. In writing a book, authors have done something they truly love doing and have had other people devote some of their time to their work. That's a great thing. Most people should be so lucky.

All that being said, Amazon reviews are often obnoxiously stupid and I wholeheartedly agree with a round of Amazon review bashing.

 

[Prefx]

I don't mean to say we should pity authors for their jobs, but it's a lot like owning your own business, only more personalized and upfront. All authors need criticism, but when you're writing to a specific audience and someone comes along and doesn't like the story because it's not for them, I find it rude to give that person a negative rating on a website which might limit their access to other readers. We're not talking about lopping off a few points, which I didn't make clear. We're talking about people who acknowledge the writing, characters, and even story, but refuse to recognize them with a process that makes or breaks an author's livelihood.

As a counter-example, it's like a reader giving a teenage-oriented novel a 1 for not having a complex storyline comparative to the one in A Song of Ice and Fire (I'm using this example just because it's one of the more popular examples on forums), or a heterosexual male purchasing erotica targeted towards the GLBT community and giving it a low rating because the topic "disgusts" him.

That John Waters intended it to be shocking and disgusting does not somehow render my viewpoint irrelevant or stupid. He wanted shocking and disgusting. I didn't like it. Should I not say so?

It depends. I'm not aware of what "Pink Flamingos" is, but if it's marketed as a shocking movie, I think it's overstepping the process to give the movie a 1 on Amazon unless the video quality is bad, the content boring, &c.

There's a level of subjectivity to all of this, of course. I like to categorize my dislikes into two separate fields: what I think is just plain around bad (sloppy prose, cliches) and what I think is bad but can recognize as not being targeted towards everyone (teenage novels, female novels, gay erotica).

And then of course you have those folks who want to degrade the author.

 

[soulsinging]

I don't mean to say we should pity authors for their jobs, but it's a lot like owning your own business, only more personalized and upfront. All authors need criticism, but when you're writing to a specific audience and someone comes along and doesn't like the story because it's not for them, I find it rude to give that person a negative rating on a website which might limit their access to other readers. We're not talking about lopping off a few points, which I didn't make clear. We're talking about people who acknowledge the writing, characters, and even story, but refuse to recognize them with a process that makes or breaks an author's livelihood.

As a counter-example, it's like a reader giving a teenage-oriented novel a 1 for not having a complex storyline comparative to the one in A Song of Ice and Fire (I'm using this example just because it's one of the more popular examples on forums), or a heterosexual male purchasing erotica targeted towards the GLBT community and giving it a low rating because the topic "disgusts" him.

Isn't George Martin's book supposed to be a new take on the epic fantasy genre though? So isn't it to be expected that people might go into it anticipating another PG-style story about a kitchen boy becoming a king and be a bit offput by the brutality of it? Don't get me wrong, I found it odd how many people have problems with the sex and violence in his books, but I think it's a legit criticism for them to think it was gratuitous and unnecessary.

And given that his overall rating is 4.5 stars on there, and that the 5-star reviews outnumber the 1-star reviews about 50 to 1, I don't think he's too broken up about it. Let's face it, the series is not for everyone and those 1-star reviews are helpful. There are many times I find them more helpful than 5-star reviews saying "It's the awesomest book ever!" I can read the 1-star review and decide whether or not the things that bothered that reviewer wouldn bother me... in the case of Martin, most of the negative reviews centered around the sex and violence, which I knew was not a problem for me so it did not stop me from getting them. Other times, people have problems with a book that I know I would share, so I avoid them (Cormac McCarthy comes to mind).

But I don't think 1-star reviews are any less helpful than the 5-star reviews, no matter what subject matter they cover in the review. If the sex bothers people, let them say it. If the sex appeals to other people, let them say that too. Better that the person reading the review, wondering if they'd like it, knows what to expect. I see the stars not as a critical judgment on the work's merit, but as a lay opinion similar to the netflix system... hated it, liked it, loved it, etc. Thus, a person is perfectly entitled to hate it for whatever reason they want and I doubt Martin takes it personally or that people reading it are unduly influenced unless the reviewer expresses similar concerns they might have.

I mean, you say that people should know to expect sex and violence in ASoIAf... how would they if they couldn't see someone's review mentiong those things?

 

[biodroid]

I have noticed that most amazon reviewers are not good at reviews. I read one where the guy said this book deserves 5 stars but he is going to give it 4 because the title name did not appeal to him or something stupid like that. The other thing that gets me going is when they rehash the plot in the review, thanks now I don't need to read the book. Everyone looking for 15 minutes of fame

 

[The Procrastinator]

Let's face it, the internet is great but one of the drawbacks is that its given a "voice" to millions of idiots.

 

[Clansman]

Let's face it, the internet is great but one of the drawbacks is that its given a "voice" to millions of idiots.

Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but opinions are not necessarily of equal value. Opinions are also like a******s. Everyone's got one.

And summarizing the plot in a review? JUST PLAIN STUPID! I mean, set the foundation for what the story is about, but almost every decent book has an element of mystery to it that a plot summary will destroy. A book review is not a bloody book report.

 

[Stephen Aryan]

I'm surprised to hear that people have found the violence in George RR Martin's books shocking, similar acts of violence have existed in other books in the fantasy genre for decades. Perhaps it is because of his international presence and who he is, that more people are being vocal about it. Personally I wasn't so shocked by anything that I felt the need to complain, some of it was surprising, and horrifying, but very in keeping with the story, and the world he has created, so I saw no problem.

On topic, the people who actually take the time to post on the internet are the vocal minority. Good or bad that is. Out of the millions of people who read, for example the Da Vinci Code, if you get 1000 reviews on Amazon you would be incredibly lucky. In fact, I've done a quick search on Amazon UK and there are 1124 reviews for The Da Vinci Code, which is tiny percentage.

That being said, reviews online can be incredibly pointless, harsh is fine if there is a point, or someone didn't like something, that's opinion, no worries. But remarks like "it was crap", don't help anyone, not the author to take on board things to look at again, or people who were interested in buying the book.

What I find most frustrating (and what is probably very frustrating for authors) is when people don't understand a book - the main purpose of the book, or the underlying themes and people read what is just on the surface. Personally speaking I find it enormously rewarding when someone has read something of mine and really understood it.

 

[steve12553]

Reversely, I read a review about LOTR being tripe and cliche.

I don't know....
Seems like if you do something original and creative and 8,000 people copy it that they are the cliche rather than you.
On the other hand, this is the internet. There is no requirement that says anyone must know what they're talking about before they espouse an opinion. Of course that also goes for you and I. I guess we just consider the source.

 

[Duchessprozac]

Frankly, an author worth his salt should expect bad reviews and will know which ones to accept and those which ignore. I'm sure they have sat through enough rejection slips to become hardened to a few comments saying 'dis book sux.'

 

[Connavar]

I started to not care about amazon reviews when i saw how the reviewers thought. Things are either the best in the world or the worst.

I only go there for synopsis of the books. Sometimes people post contents of a collection. Thats only the reasons go there.

 

[Prototype]

Some people just aren't happy unless they're moaning and so they'll have a stab at anything just to make themselves feel a mite better.

I'm sure there's some kind of saying which says "if you're good at something do it, if you can't, write about it, and if you can't do that, become a critic" (I'm sure someone will help me out with the exact quote!). Perhaps we should add that "if you can't become a critic, become a idiotic internet blogger" or something? (This isn't to say that I think all internet blogger's are idiots- just to clarify!)

 

[iansales]

Er, critics need to be able to write. They also need to understand how fiction (or whatever field of art it is) works.

People who post reviews on Amazon, however... All they need is an opinion. It doesn't even have to be right.

 

[McMurphy]

I've been going through Amazon reviews recently to gage some views on popular fantasy novels, and coming out of it I've gained some sympathy for all authors. People are cruel, vicious, and a lot of times stupid with their comments. For an example, reviewers are attacking the instances of sex and deaths in George Martin's works. Uh - yeah, last I checked, realism is what his series is based off of.

Reversely, I read a review about LOTR being tripe and cliche. *Smacks forehead.*

Perhaps we as readers need to show more care for authors and the months they spend creating their work. I just can't fathom what it's like to have your "baby" criticized in a way that makes absolutely no sense.

The shame of the Amazon review system is that out of the hundreds of posted troll behavior, there are a handful of sufficated comments that could actually help potential readers make an informed purchase. I am not suggesting that the reviews need to be positive, but can't something be done about weeding out comments that start and end with the line "this sux"?

Hopefully, the league of adoring fans can nurture the thick skin of widely successful authors.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I've had reviews -- both good and not-so-good and not always on amazon -- where the reviewer summarizes the book and mentions things that did not happen.

When this particular kind of review is a bit snarky, it's easy to dismiss it, because the reader must have skimmed over the book very lightly and filled in the parts they didn't read out of their own imagination -- or started to read the book, decided they knew what it was going to be about (and they were wrong) and reviewed that imaginary book instead. This is all very well, but how to react when a review is very favorable, and equally off-base in summarizing the plot? I can't dismiss the first sort and congratulate myself on the second.

 

[D_Davis]

There is no pity for the artist who releases their work out into the world for public consumption.

As soon as the artist lets go, that work is open to all sorts of criticism and opinions, be them poorly informed, well written, intelligent, or moronic.

What we have to remember is this:

criticism of the art does not necessarily translate into criticism of the artist as a person, but instead it often says more about the critic in question.

 

[Clansman]

Well said, Mr. Davis. Much more elegant than my more vulgar phrasing above.

 

[icowdave]

I find that perhaps 1 in 10 reviews on Amazon are of any value to me. Am I being generous? So many people are snarky or nasty because of the anonymity of the internets. People will say things to each other in forums and elsewhere that they would never dream of saying face to face. Why would reviews be any different? Express your opinions, of course, but use a little tact and try to be constructive. Everybody loves a well thought out and articulated review. Sometimes even when we don't agree with the reviewer.

As for the author, D_Davis has it right. It's the price you pay for your craft. You have to live for the people you touch and take what you can from the rest to hone your skills. A thick skin is a job requirement when you invest yourself into your art.

 

[Zoe_W]

Amazon review also don't do you any good if it's just some random person posting a single review of a book. Nobody cares to look at his one review, and let's face it, "I liked it! Awesome story" does not make for a convincing review.

I don't mind dealing with criticism, but the silent ones get to me. I try to remember that the vocal folks, who write whether they like or dislike a story, are just a smaller minority. Hidden out there in Internet-land is a much larger group of people who read and say nothing. So, even though it stings to be called boring or too wordy, that criticism doesn't bother me nearly as much as dead silence.