This year, I have gotten more emails from authors and publishers unhappy about negative reviews and/or comment threads here at AAR than I have in the previous five years. It’s not a huge number but we’ve typically gotten one a year in earlier times.
AAR will, as it always has, continue to publish unbiased reviews. I’m deeply proud of the work our staff does and I stand behind it 100%. That policy is not up for argument.
For the sake of this discussion, let’s set aside that negative reviews are vastly outweighed at AAR by positive and it’s fine reviews. And let’s agree that all the comments here will aim to be constructive rather than in the vein of those damn authors, they should be grateful you review their books. What I’m curious about here is what do we, readers whose lives are lifted by the literature we read, owe authors when one of their works lets us down. Thoughts?
On Twitter, I’ve seen a growing number of authors who think it’s OK to complain about negative reviews. Or even mock the readers who post them. Ugh!
I think this might happen because they’re followed by so many fellow authors (and maybe not that many potential readers), so they forget they’re not in a private writing group. Or maybe they don’t care that other people can see their posts.
Many of these authors seem new to publishing, so no one has pointed out this is a bad look. Unfortunately, they’re often followed by other authors who have the same opinions and support them.
Just this morning, I saw a post where an author was mocking a reader who posted a one-star review. :-|
Sigh….
This is also true and, dare I say it? It seems to me to be the younger and newer authors (in general) who are most often guilty of this. I suspect that it’s partly due to the fact that younger people – those who unlike me – grew up with the internet, and don’t often have the healthy scepticism about it that people my age (late 50s) do, and somehow don’t realise that they’re NOT just talking to the people in their own front room when they post on SM. I love the internet but I’m careful with whatever I post as I’ve seen how easily things can be misinterpreted. It’s so sad that so many people say things in cyberspace that they’d never say in person. Or maybe they would…
I dunno. I’m seeing older, very established authors express their unhappiness with negative reviews and telling publishers to limit access to review books to sites they feel have maligned them.
I’ve always thought that a negative review of my books deserves obscurity, rather than notoriety.
I’m an author. You owe them nothing but politeness. You’ve reviewed my books in the past, and I’ve had good, I’ve had not-so-good (but no dnf’s thank goodness!). But that’s your privilege. You have always made clear that this is your opinion, and when you don’t like something, you say so, and why. What you never do is insult the author, or your audience.
Unfortunately, Amazon has monetised the review. It matters to the author, now, it has to. Many authors buy reviews, just to get their profile up. Readers can’t trust reviews any more, and this is much wider than books. It’s banned, but it’s easy to get around that, and the reviews that say “this is wonderful,” tell you nothing. The ones that say, “this is awful,” don’t tell you anything, either. But it is so obvious, and Amazon doesn’t care. As long as the book sells, they’re fine with that.
Here, you’re not invested in how well the book sells, so your reviews are trustworthy, and honest.
Speaking of Amazon, here’s another point I should bring up about reviews, particularly in regard to erotica: A bad review complaining of taboo content can get a self-published erotica author’s title adult flagged or blocked. And sadly, a lot of these complaints are absurd given the genre. I’m talking about people giving a one-star review that says, “This is nothing but filthy smut that should be promptly removed from Amazon for lack of decency!” for a book clearly titled something like, “Fifty Filthy Flings: Totally Not-Decent Smut.”
For a more specific example of this phenomenon, the eroticauthors subreddit strongly advises smut authors not to include any alcohol consumption in their self-published work through Amazon. While I understand why someone would be furious if an erotica takes an unexpected noncon/dubcon turn that includes drunken sex, there have been reviewers who will say ridiculous things like, “OMG! Rape!” just because the characters had one glass of wine with dinner before having sex. Seriously. But since Amazon wants to promote a somewhat wholesome image of themselves, they will take that kind of complaint seriously and punish the author for it according to the horror stories I’ve read.
So circling back to what reviewers “owe” authors, I would say this: please at least be a considerate, somewhat intelligent adult when commenting on Amazon about content that offends you. For self-published erotica authors in particular, hysterical cries of “rape” because of one glass of wine can get those authors in serious trouble. Worst case scenario, they could get their accounts terminated.
I’ll be the first to admit I’m a dreadful reviewer on GR and don’t review anywhere else , mostly because I recognize I’m not good at it. I am more prone to a few glowing words on books I loved and three paragraphs of adjective-vomit on books I didn’t. It’s all of a piece though – I am more inclined to steer people away from books that I don’t think are worth their time and money, and I don’t consider the author much at all. Perhaps it’s naive or short-sighted of me, but once a book hits publication the author is owed – in my opinion – nothing more than the cost of the book. Anything beyond that is a reflection of the quality of the work itself, and isn’t owed, per se; it’s earned.
Two mildly relevant anecdotes:
– Long ago I submitted a first page to Dear Author. It was well received though the book itself turned into a non-starter, buried forever, but what I appreciated most was the honest critiques. I DID head hop too much. I DID need more research. And if someone hadn’t said something, I might have birthed another historical out into the world to be excoriated for those very tiresome things.
– Not as long ago, I tried to deconstruct how Caz writes her reviews so that I could be better at it. I failed (and would totally take a class of it were offered or if AAR had a blog series on the topic, hint hint) but I think it speaks to the quality of reviews here and on the GR pages of all the AAR staffers I follow that it is recognizably both useful and structured in such a way that it’s respectful to the content whether or not the book itself passes muster.
I’m not sure I could deconstruct how I write my reviews, but thank you for the compliment!
I love your reviews, Caz. You have a skill for noticing nuances, especially in narrations, that I don’t, or if I do, I can’t put words to what I’m thinking. When I was reviewing for Audiogals, Lee Hensley helped me polish my style and I’m still benefiting from her help, but I know my reviews were never as consistently thorough as yours. Writing reviews takes time and energy, even the shorter personal, and they also take a good memory for details, and not just for the book your reviewing. Really good reviewers remember past books by the author (and/or narrator), as well as other books in the same genre that might be comparable to it.
The high quality of reviews here on AAR (and on Audiogals) is a real blessing. Every day I look forward to reading the reviews, even if it’s a book I know I’m interested in. The reviews themselves are a pleasure to read and I always learn something.
*I mean,I read the reviews even if I’m NOT interested int he book.
Thank you, Carrie. I think our reviewers do a great job too!
Amazing questions!
Q: What do we owe authors?
A: The same respect and fair treatment we owe anyone else we encounter in “real life” meaning you can dislike or critique their work honestly or even things they say personally, but you don’t “own” them because you bought their book and they don’t “owe” you any more than that same respect back. I can think of a couple of examples of what I mean.
Carla Kelly had written several years ago that she had actually petitioned Amazon to take a comment down, not because it was a bad or negative review, but because it genuinely scared her and she found it personally threatening. The “reviewer” basically said something horrible like Carla Kelly was basically “dead’ because she wasn’t writing Regencies at the time and she hated her new books. I’m paraphrasing but it was threatening and ugly enough it scared Ms. Kelly and I can’t blame her. That kind of vitriol because an author changed subjects or styles is clearly not healthy behavior. If you enjoy someone’s previous work that much, thank them for the enjoyment it gave you and move on.
I believe Charlaine Harris had to cancel the book tours/interviews she usually has when she released the last book in her Sookie Stackhouse series because people were so outraged at how she ended the series. I can’t say if it was because she didn’t want angry people coming at her or she was actually fearful but it’s pretty unnerving that the decision had to be made. Now I understand that was a huge series for so many and AAR’s message boards used to be full of threads on it. In fact as a long time reader of CH’s I saw where she was going with Sookie’s love life based on past series and caused a lot of unhappy campers here when I posted my prediction (which was right) before the last book or two was published. (And truthfully if that many readers are unhappy with your writing, chances are something did go astray.) HOWEVER no writer of popular fiction should be uneasy to go on a book tour because of “fans”.
Otherwise I think what everyone else has so elegantly said is true. Authors are owed honest, fair reviews with details explaining what worked and what didn’t and why.
Q: What do authors owe readers?
A: Good work they are proud of if it is something they are asking readers to spend their money on.
Yikes! It must sometimes be terrifying for a writer who wants to try something new. When Stephen King published MISERY 30-plus years ago, the idea of an obsessed fan becoming so overly-enmeshed with an author’s fictional characters that they would resort to kidnapping and bodily harm seemed nothing more than a scary story, but now authors have to petition to have threatening reviews taken down and have to cancel book tours because of fear of disgruntled fans. That seems to be the double-edged sword of the online culture: on the one hand, writers can engage with their readers in an almost simultaneous fashion on a variety of platforms; but on the other hand, there are those readers who take being upset with the direction of a particular character/book/series to a frightening level. It’s baffling to me that some people just don’t have the personal boundaries (or ability to cope) to not take personally things like a writer trying something new or ending a series. I love reading and discussing books, but I’d never contemplate terrorizing a writer who disappointed me.
And “Misery” was in part inspired by Stephen King’s experience with fans who were upset that he dared write a fantasy novel. :-/ (And perhaps by the stalkers who have been after him for years.)
The cult of celebrity has gotten crazier and crazier hasn’t it?
When King wrote Misery it was likely based on fans at book signings and conventions as well as people who took the time to type out and mail letter to him. Since then things have just exploded exponentially each year.
“The cult of the celebrity has gotten crazier and crazier hasn’t it?”
For some reason, this reminds me of a self-proclaimed grouch who said, “Why does anybody care what celebrities think anyhow? You do realize these are adults who play pretend for a living, right?”
As a writer- much of whose job consists of the priceless pleasure of “playing pretend” as a grownup without it being considered too weird- I have to say this is spot-on and hysterical.
I agree, we have all had disappointing reading experiences or had an author kill off a beloved character (more so in mystery series) and if people don’t like it they simply can stop buying. I think we have all seen how the power of the pocketbook drives so many things. If their sales drop, then an author will have to decide if their vision is more important to them than more popularity/sales. And that’s something only they can answer. Readers certainly don’t get to decide what an author writes or how and authors can’t make an audience buy their books.
It is scary how prescient Misery was and I think with online presence that line between thinking you “know” an author or celebrity has gotten thinner and thinner.
I am sure that is one reason why even really famous authors take other pseudonyms even though they could sell more by linking the names. It must feel very freeing to write something “anonymously” again after years of fame an notoriety.
“It must feel very freeing to write something “anonymously” again after years of fame an notoriety.”
Definitely. And writing is one of the few fields where someone can be anonymous and reinvent themselves via a new pen name. The real challenge at that point is only working with reputable publishers who won’t leak that name to the public.
“Power of the pocketbook” to motivate an author is not a new thing: Arthur Conan Doyle killed off Sherlock Holmes at one point, but his non-Holmesian work failed to find a market and he eventually had to bring Holmes back, explaining that he (Holmes) had miraculously survived his plummet over the Reichenbach Falls and had been living incognito for several years.
One of my favorite authors Barbara Michaels/Elizabeth Peters wrote an article years ago for The Writer I think called “Series characters, love ‘em or leave them alone!”
She talked about the “lure of the Reichenbach” and how Doyle had to backtrack and revive poor Mr. Holmes. Her excellent advice to other authors was basically- if you are burnt out and not thinking kindly of your series characters, step back. Don’t make a rash decision or do write anything dire you and your audience may regret.
I owe authors a few basic things – a complete, thorough reading of the doc I’ve been given access to (if major edits are made between publication and the receipt of the review copy, it’s not my fault that I’ve commented on them). A lack of personal attacks. As refined a copy as I can put out (thank you, Caz).
I don’t owe them a “nice” review, fairness, or objectivity. It’s not my job not to be passionate about what I read, though I will try to either put myself in the mind of the author’s fans or genre fans when I put a review out.
Reviewing is about the subjective opinion of the reviewer – it’s our job to be accurate to the facts, opinionated, and entertaining. If you publish a weird story in which your grandpa has a torrid affair with Lucille Ball, or write about a teenager bashing together the genitals of a couple of gingerbread people in front of a bunch of kids and consider it “funny”, or make up an affair between a white colonel and a notable Black historical figure for soapy melodrama’s sake to the point where you’re having her be entirely motivated by his presence which does not match what happened to her in the real world, or approvingly speak of “manifest destiny” in your tome, I am not going to be nice about the book. If you’ve put out dull or offensive books repeatedly, I’m going to make note of it.
I think you are shortchanging yourself on the “fairness” aspect. If you are being honest about everything you don’t like and aren’t misrepresenting anything in your review then you are definitely “fair”.
It should be pretty clear in your review why you don’t like something and you have every right not to like it. To me being “unfair” would be having a unrevealed bias against an author and tearing down their work as revenge or some other kind of dishonesty. Reviews are in a way somewhat “unfair” because they’re not something that can be “measured” objectively or scientifically. It’s more like judging ice dancing than speed skating. Every reviewer and reader has some kind of bias whether it’s not liking Space or Western settings or having a preference for a certain hair color.
I also hope that reviewers should have the same goal in reviewing that I do in life: make the world a better place. Negative reviews certainly do that as long as they’re supported and fair.
Oh Dabney I would be happy if people would just agree to the “fair” part let alone trying to make things better!
THIS.
If an author puts out weird, offensive, regressive, or dull work, it’s the reviewer’s job to highlight – for other committed or perspective readers – what was weird, offensive, regressive, or dull. I’m grateful for reviews that have steered me away from content I won’t like and even when I’ve bought a book and still plan on reading it, I appreciate the heads up.
Ooops, meant to write prospective, not perspective! ;)
I agree with Caz: Reviews are for readers and AAR is a community of romance readers.
Authors and writers have spaces of their own to hear feedback on their work (editors, beta readers, writing groups, classrooms, book signings or publicity events, conferences, social media) and while they can always peek at what readers are saying about their writing in reader spaces (AAR, Goodreads, blogs, social media), I believe they should do so with the understanding that the community isn’t built for them. Personally, I think it reflects poorly on authors who use their social media account to disagree with a critical Goodreads review or comment on a less-than-flattering blog post.
I also wonder if this discussion of critical romance reviews is shaped by gender and genre. Since I began reading romance, I’ve been surprised by the over abundance of effusive positive reviews I’ve seen outside of AAR. Does the hype reflect a genre that revolves around literally and metaphorically bringing people together?
Romance is also understood as distinctly feminine; a genre by women writers, about women’s lives, for women readers. Women are expected to be nice and non-confrontational, express mild or non-disruptive opinions, and be warmly inclusive or welcoming on behalf of a larger social group. In romance specifically, do unabashedly critical reviews interrupt expectations of gender?
I don’t think readers “owe” authors anything, but for myself, I try to write or think about books as if they’re written by real people and keep my opinions grounded in the work they produced and published. I also gravitate towards reviews, podcasts, and Instagram accounts that take strong positions and make effective or interesting arguments. Even if I disagree or reacted to a book differently, it always gets me thinking.
Those are all excellent points, Cece. Your second paragraph from the bottom about how “critical reviews [of romance] interrupt expectations of gender” is particularly insightful. To add to that, some people probably aren’t used to romance being reviewed seriously at all. It’s almost like they expect nothing but starry-eyed positive reviews extolling the virtues of Fabio and feel gobsmacked that such a genre could ever be critically discussed.
Thank you, Nan De Plume!
Yes, I agree! Online, in mainstream media, and even in my own life, I’ve noticed that some people are taken aback by serious conversations about romance or seem to be “expect nothing but starry-eyed positive reviews extolling the virtues of Fabio”.
I wonder if this comes from an earlier period in romance, when the genre was thoroughly denigrated, academic scholarship was either non-existent or patronizing, and fans weren’t able to find one another as easily on the internet. If readers had to push back on external criticism of the genre so often, were they disinclined to listen or tolerate internal criticism (i.e, negative reviews)? By perhaps drawing a rosy picture of romance, were they trying to shout down rampant criticism and draw in new readers?
I think we’ve entered a new time for romance and I’m delighted — I’m definitely someone who enjoys reading romance uncritically as much as I enjoy critical discussions of it!
“I’m definitely someone who enjoys reading romance uncritically as much as I enjoy critical discussions of it!”
I agree that there’s definitely room for both. Sometimes, you just want to read something for over the top fun, no analysis desired or required. And sometimes, you’re dying to know what someone else thought of the brilliance or train wreck you recently read.
Just as an aside: In all fairness to Fabio, I did have the pleasure of meeting him once- long before I read my first romance novel. He was very sweet to everyone who wanted to talk with him- even annoying people like me who were trying to sell him stuff (he had a vendor’s booth for protein shakes, long story).
Oh my gosh, I’ve heard about Fabio’s protein shake booths!! I collect the old Johanna Lindsey covers that feature him and it’s lovely to know he’s a genuinely generous and sweet guy.
Oh, he is. And he was definitely generous with his time, even when he was talking with obviously star-struck fans. He didn’t rush anybody, and he was very approachable and accessible. Heck, a lot of people hugged him for pictures! Can you imagine many other celebrities who would allow fans to get so intimate? Not saying they should have to, but Fabio was just unbelievably kind to everyone whether fans, customers, or fellow salespeople.
Getting back to what we were saying about romance not being taken seriously as a genre because of it being female-centered, there was a great three minute clip about this on YouTube. It might still be there. Basically, Chris Rice (son of Anne Rice) and his partner/husband (can’t remember which) interviewed Christina Lauren (two people) a few years ago. They had a nice talk about how weird it is that frivolous things men tend to like get taken way more seriously in society as a whole than frivolous things women tend to like- even though they’re all just forms of entertainment. I think they brought up how silly it is that football and over the top action films where the whole military can’t hit the broad side of the hero are somehow considered superior to sweeping romance novels. Interesting stuff…
Yes, I agree with that! Action movies are just as much wish fulfillment/escapist fantasies as romance novels but we definitely think of them differently. It’s really, really interesting to me how romance is often considered a deviation from popular culture or inherently “niche” while traditionally masculine genre products are considered part of the mainstream.
“Action movies are just as much wish fulfillment/escapist fantasies as romance novels but we definitely think of them differently.”
I think this is true for the most part, but I do have an anecdotal example of how action flicks can also get the brush off. The other day, I found an interesting hour long 2013 interview of Dwight Schultz and Dirk Benedict at a convention where they discussed The A-Team. I was surprised to learn that despite being the number 1 network TV show for a good run, the network itself hated the program on the grounds that they considered themselves “a filet mignon network while The A-Team is a hamburger show.”
Schultz went on to say how hostile the atmosphere was, to the point where people on the crew would whisper, “Hey, I like your show, man,” because they were too ashamed to admit in a normal tone of voice that they liked the bloodless, high-octane, slapstickish, rather juvenile show that was The A-Team. (Confession: when I was younger, I thought The A-Team was a ton of fun. Not sure how well it would hold up now. Maybe I don’t want to know…)
Plus, the CEO (or some big wig) at the time did a newspaper interview basically saying (paraphrase), “We don’t like The A-Team because we think that’s beneath what we’re capable of offering at our network.” Schultz sent the guy a telegram (this was the 1980s) saying how much that hurt him and the other cast members who worked hard every week to put on a fun show that audiences liked but the network had no respect for. And… things never improved. They got cancelled after 4 years without so much as a cast party.
So, in short, I think genre work in general has the potential to get the shaft from the nose-in-the-air types.
That’s interesting. I remember reading something similar about another show, Gilligan’s Island maybe? The head of the network hated it and was embarrassed by it and even though it was still pulling in big ratings it was cancelled. He of course came to regret it but the damage was done.
Thanks for mentioning Dirk Benedict! Oh how I loved Lt. Starbuck back in the day.
You’re welcome! I’ve never seen Battlestar Galactica, believe it or not. But I definitely watched a number of the formulaic and hokey shows (I say this with admiration!) like Gilligan’s Island, The A-Team, MacGyver, Star Trek, Bonanza, and a few others. Over the air television is actually being really smart right now for showing these fun standbys on their free network programming.
Anyway, if you need a good laugh, I’ve found that any YouTube interview videos with both Schultz and Benedict are naturally funny. They have a really great chemistry whether they’re acting or just being themselves. Shatner and Nimoy had that too- still feeling a bit sad Mr. Nimoy is no longer with us. :(
I love this. It’s also almost exclusively run by women and women are supposed to be nice to each other.
One of the things I love most about the romance genre is that it is so women-centric and one of the few areas in business that was super successful and dominated by women. It’s (mainly) content created for women and consumed by women.
Unlike other areas like fashion, which was often male controlled but financially supported by women, romance always felt like it’s own female eco-system.
I can say for me, as long as a review is honest and fair I have no problems with it. We can’t have special rules that say no woman can be criticized. That’s ridiculous and reductive.
I did have a big problem with how Lisa Kleypas was treated by some people in the romance community a few years ago. People have a right to their opinions and reviews but when ugliness and sheer meanness comes out in an unfair way it’s wrong. I think Kleypas handled the whole situation with her usual grace and earnestness and I think she’s someone who has lent a lot of credibility and positivity to the genre over the years.
She had a very small amount (a line or two) in a book that many felt was inappropriate and damaging. She immediately apologized, had her editors remove it and was never defensive or unkind despite some really ugly comments. This is one small hiccup in a pretty illustrious career of several decades. It generated some behavior against her that I cannot help but think was promoted by some kind of schadenfreude or jealousy because I think it was way beyond what the situation called for. It’s not that I think she is “above reproach” and can never be criticized, just that I thought it was hurtful that someone who has given a lot to the genre had so many people willing to figuratively burn her at the stake as some example of everything that is wrong in the romance genre.
It’s interesting you bring up the Kleypas case. That made me deeply uncomfortable. The book had already been published and she pulled it and had it changed. I’m not sure that’s a precedent I think bodes well for authors.
I’m not familiar with the specifics regarding the Klepas case, but I too am uncomfortable when authors jump to withdraw all or part of their work because of complaints. It’s definitely a bad precedent that cedes power to the professionally aggrieved and encourages more of the same damaging behavior.
This is especially true when a lot of those critics are not the thoughtful sort who write thorough, detailed analyses pointing out the strengths, weaknesses, and problematic aspects of a particular book. It’s the people on Twitter and elsewhere who don’t have anything more substantial to say than, “OMG! Racist! (or insert complaint here)” that are often scaring authors into caving into their tantrums.
Sure, if an author wants to correct a glaring typo or factual error that someone complained about, fine. But when it comes to iffy subjective stuff, I would strongly advise authors to just move on to the next project rather than trying to appease the kind of people who sit around waiting, just itching to find something to whine about as an attention-seeking and/or bullying tactic.
It was some of the vitriol that really bothered me. There was one author I won’t name who really turned me off so badly by things they wrote that I’ve never bought their books even though they were on my to buy list at the time.
I do feel like maybe Kleypas thought it just wasn’t worth the battle or bad publicity over what amounted to a couple of lines in the book. Not terribly long before that another author (Mary Balogh?) was singled out about a supporting character and when she tried to defend her choices people went for her.
I’ve always thought that Lisa Kleypas brought a lot of good publicity, class and sophistication to the romance genre which has been poked fun at and ridiculed over the years. She was such a fine representative during all those years of shirtless male covers and little respect for romance authors or readers that it really rubbed me the wrong way that she was suddenly the scapegoat for everything wrong in the world because of two or three lines in a book.
I personally can think of so many authors who have written and do write far worse that have never been singled out that it really felt to me like Kleypas’s name was used (due to her fame) to create something that would get a lot of publicity rather than address more egregious but less well known authors and work.
It makes more sense that a popular author, like Lisa Kleypas, would be noticed than a lesser known author. By deleting those 2 lines, Kleypas set a good example to not employ offensive stereotypes. I don’t see her editing out the offending sentences as a bad thing. It is commendable of her. She is a leading writer in the genre for a reason so it is appropriate that she lead in taking on offensive stereotypes.
I don’t like seeing decent people being used to make someone else more famous.
It wasn’t handled like “There were a couple of lines that were problematic and it would be best if they were addressed”. It was more like “This is an outrage and everything wrong with the world today, everyone please pile on!”
If a person or a site is cherry picking and skipping over big offenses to find something small on a more famous person to bolster their credibility or views I think it’s dishonorable.
You have to have to have the same set of standards across the board applied fairly. If you don’t, then you lose credibility with me.
The trope she used is so common in romance–it seemed like such a big deal over something that is very common.
Thank you, Dabney. I love that romance is “almost exclusively run by women” and I’m so grateful that AAR takes the sometimes-not nice step of independently critiquing romance novels.
… or have terrible catfights.
are we conforming to pattern also when the pattern is negative?
This is just anecdotal, based on my experiences, but I used to regularly visit a lot more romance sites than I do today. However, over the years so many of those sites simply devolved into blurb machines where every review was some variation on: “OMG, five perfect stars, I’ll never read a book like this again, it’s my life!!! Ovaries exploding!!! Heart eyes!!!” Too much gush, not enough explanation of why the book elicited such a reaction. I appreciate that the sites I visit regularly (especially AAR) post thoughtful and insightful reviews of a wide variety of romance (and romance-adjacent) books.
Hmmm, that’s interesting. I wonder what’s driving that…are reviewers too close personally to authors or publicity professionals via their blogs or social media?
Or could reviewers feel challenged by expressing affection or enthusiasm without getting personal? I’ll admit, I find it difficult to review or talk about books I’ve loved because it’s tough to avoid discussing what I’ve brought to the reading experience and why I’ve resonated to a particular romance.
Hahaha, I don’t have a human fated mate, but I definitely have book fated mates!
I think many people have trouble expressing themselves, and are unsure of their writing skills. People a couple of generations younger than me have become accustomed to communicating online, using various forms of shorthand to do so. Enjoying reading and knowing how to write are two entirely separate skills, and writing skills have eroded imo.
This certainly does not account for all the squees and emojis found in online reviews, but I think its a partial explanation.
I think it’s that online reviews and business have just gotten bigger and bigger. I think because I see a smaller group of people posting here and on other sites and recognize many of the same names that I can forget how influential online sites and reviews can be.
I know when I’ve seen “best of” books here or another site, or certain recommendations, particularly of lesser known authors, they will often show up together in the new books section in the main library in my state.
Its happened too many times with authors that aren’t that famous for it to be coincidence over the years. People and institutions are looking and taking note of various sites and it affects the book business hence the need to control or spin the reviews many places.
This has been my experience as well. Sorry, not everything is a 5-star or A review. And if you give it 5 stars or an A, I want to know why. In detail. AAR does that for me (although I think there has been grade inflation even here at AAR in the last few years). I occasionally check in other places, but AAR is my go-to source. (BTW – I *never* read Amazon reviews anymore – haven’t for more than a decade; and almost never log in to Goodreads. It’s usefulness for reviews is not much better than Amazon, IMHO. My occasional check-ins are with book review-specific sites.)
Wow! Another great ASK topic! I’ve read all the responses so far, agreed with quite a few of them, and have some thoughts to add: 1) I’m sorry you’ve been getting flack from authors and publishers about your reviews. This is all speculation just based on my observations, but I think the increase in criticism has to do with a wider cultural problem. Frankly, authors and publishers are running scared because this is, unfortunately, an era where complaints can lead to contracts being dropped or books being pulled pre-production. I don’t consider AAR to be part of this culture, by the way, but as a third party that is much smaller than Twitter, Amazon, or Goodreads, you may look like an easy target. A scapegoat, if you will. Just remember what happened during that RWA kerfuffle a few months back. Was anybody calling for Amazon to withdraw offensive books from their catalog? Or to curtail positive reviews of allegedly “racist” books? Of course not! Because Amazon is a behemoth. Those complaints would disappear into cyberspace because a company that large is virtually untouchable. But a relatively small, articulate website with a faithful following? That’s an easy target for bullying. 2) I have a problem with the overuse of the word “owe” these days, as in “authors owe readers this” and “readers owe authors that.” When did we get into this mindset that we’re somehow indebted to each other? Like Deborah said, the reader owes the author the payment for the book either directly through buying it or indirectly through borrowing it via legitimate channels like public libraries. But that’s it. The author already did her job by writing the book. Sure, readers, reviewers, authors, and everybody else should treat one another with respect, but I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s owed. It’s just plain decent. 3) Reviews are an interesting thing. A lot has already been said here about the subjectivity of readers likes and dislikes, and I’d just like to add a little bit more to this concept. First, as many have said, a one star review can actually help an author sell books. If the reviewer says, “Ugh! The sex scenes in this romance were way too graphic, and the characters never seemed satisfied with plain old missionary,” a reader might say, “Gee, I’m up for some wild sexy times that go beyond missionary. I’ll check that out!” (Trying to keep this relatively clean for AAR…) Conversely, a five-star review can drive readers away as in, “OMG, awesome! This is a real tribute to the old days of romantic thrillers when the men were tough as nails and the women were slinky and seductive,” only for a reader to say, “Ugh, this sounds way too old school for me. Skip.” Second, one star reviews can help make a book look legitimate as in people other than the author’s friends and family actually read it. Third, no two people ever read the same book. One reviewer can adore the same exact elements another reviewer condemned. So while a glowing review can be an ego trip for an author and a bad review can be a cause for a conniption fit, I think overall that authors would be better off ignoring them (a herculean task, but we can try). For one thing, it’s impossible to please everyone. It’s never going