Ne'er the twain shall meet

[Dana Jean]

I'm just curious about everyone's thoughts on this. Reviews, to me, are opinions. We all have different experiences that influence the way we see a piece of work. For instance, I loathe The Grapes of Wrath. By most, it is considered an amazing classic. So, it's all subjective. What is the maturity level at time of reading? How many interruptions did the reader experience that might influence the flow of the story? What personal life situations are coloring the read? What's one man's trash is another's work of art.

One particular work by an author or artist might be bad to me, but they can have ten other things I think are masterpieces. Or vice versa. So my opinions aren't elevating nor condemning a person's whole life and body of work. Just one aspect of it, either way.

Those who do the job of reviewer professionally are good writers. They give a synopsis of the story, and without giving spoilers, they give us their overall thoughts and feelings on the project they are reviewing. They know how to hand out criticisms and kudos with equal skill most of the time.

Then you have the joe blows of the world giving their opinions, their "reviews." And how helpful or good they are fluctuates.

I've been blabbing away my thoughts on some Cemetery Dance books, but I've had to stop and really think about these people I am talking about. The author, the artist. They are people with feelings -- that is in the back of mind, but should it be? I can get colorful with my thoughts, and sometimes they can be harsh. What is my responsibility? What is your responsibility? Should we treat every review, every comment, as a Participation Trophy with hive fives and "good jobs?" Or, is it okay to be harsh?

Why I ask all this, apparently there was a bit of a dust up on Goodreads over a book by Josh Malerman, UNBURY CAROL. His wife was very unhappy with a review he received from the average Joe, and she let this person have it!

Malerman posted an apology (I think on Goodread? Haven't gone to Goodread to check all this out, but hearing about it second hand.)

While this was unfortunate and I think it is kind of the rule of thumb with authors and artists -- you can't please everyone and you should never engage -- I understand the wife's feelings of protection. I'm guessing she watched her husband work so hard on this book, felt his joy, felt his struggle to do a good job. Family time was probably sacrificed while her husband was writing. She was a passionate champion of her husband and his work.

Also, there is another dust up between Terry Goodkind and his artist over a cover of one of his books. I will link to the story. For the record, I love the art for his cover. I think it is fantastic and NOT "laughably bad." But, maybe it didn't fit the story contained within?

'Laughably bad': Terry Goodkind apologises after insulting cover of his own book | Books | The Guardian

I don't know what I'm asking here -- should we treat these things with the old addage:

If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all?

 

[Neesy]

I'm just curious about everyone's thoughts on this. Reviews, to me, are opinions. We all have different experiences that influence the way we see a piece of work. For instance, I loathe The Grapes of Wrath. By most, it is considered an amazing classic. So, it's all subjective. What is the maturity level at time of reading? How many interruptions did the reader experience that might influence the flow of the story? What personal life situations are coloring the read? What's one man's trash is another's work of art.

One particular work by an author or artist might be bad to me, but they can have ten other things I think are masterpieces. Or vice versa. So my opinions aren't elevating nor condemning a person's whole life and body of work. Just one aspect of it, either way.

Those who do the job of reviewer professionally are good writers. They give a synopsis of the story, and without giving spoilers, they give us their overall thoughts and feelings on the project they are reviewing.

Then you have the joe blows of the world giving their opinions, their "reviews." And how helpful or good they are fluctuates.

I've been blabbing away my thoughts on some Cemetery Dance books, but I've had to stop and really think about these people I am talking about. The author, the artist. They are people with feelings -- that is in the back of mind, but should it be? I can get colorful with my thoughts, and sometimes they can be harsh. What is my responsibility? Should I treat every review as a Participation Trophy with hive fives and "good jobs?" Or, is it okay to be harsh?

Why I ask all this, apparently there was a bit of a dust up on Goodreads over a book by Josh Malerman, UNBURY CAROL. His wife was very unhappy with a review he received from the average Joe, and she let this person have it!

Malerman posted an apology (I think on Goodread? Haven't gone to Goodread to check all this out, but hearing about it second hand.)

While this was unfortunate and I think it is kind of the rule of thumb with authors and artists -- you can't please everyone and you should never engage -- I understand the wife's feelings of protection. I'm guessing she watched her husband work so hard on this book, felt his joy, felt his struggle to do a good job. Family time was probably sacrificed while her husband was writing. She was a passionate champion of her husband and his work.

Also, there is the dust up between Terry Goodkind and his artist over a cover of one of his books. I will link to the story. For the record, I love the art for his cover. I think it is fantastic and NOT "laughably bad." But, maybe it didn't fit the story contained within?

'Laughably bad': Terry Goodkind apologises after insulting cover of his own book | Books | The Guardian

I don't know what I'm asking here -- should we treat these things with the old addage:

If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all?

I noticed the same thing when reading the reviews of the book about Elizabeth Smart - they said she sounded like a child. (This was on Good Reads).

I'm reading it right now and to me she sounds just fine. She even said something that made we chuckle a bit. She was 14 when she was abducted and now she's turned out to be a mature young woman. I think her faith and her family helped her to get over it.

So you're always going to get critical people who review books. I'm sorry to hear that the wife felt so bad about her husband's poor review. Can you imagine if Tabitha got upset in the beginning when many were criticizing Stephen King's books?

I think she (the wife of Josh Malerman) will have to develop a thick skin and not take everything so personally.

 

[Dana Jean]

I noticed the same thing when reading the reviews of the book about Elizabeth Smart - they said she sounded like a child. (This was on Good Reads).

I'm reading it right now and to me she sounds just fine. She even said something that made we chuckle a bit. She was 14 when she was abducted and now she's turned out to be a mature young woman. I think her faith and her family helped her to get over it.

So you're always going to get critical people who review books. I'm sorry to hear that the wife felt so bad about her husband's poor review. Can you imagine if Tabitha got upset in the beginning when many were criticizing Stephen King's books?

I think she (the wife of Josh Malerman) will have to develop a thick skin and not take everything so personally.

Elizabeth Smart was a child. Hearing her tell her story in that child's voice might be very poignant. You feel her fear, pain and struggle as a child. I would think that would make the book even more hard hitting. But, see? That's my opinion. I haven't read it, but what might be a very realistic and in-the-moment sort of authenticity to me, might put someone else off.

 

[Neesy]

Elizabeth Smart was a child. Hearing her tell her story in that child's voice might be very poignant. You feel her fear, pain and struggle as a child. I would think that would make the book even more hard hitting. But, see? That's my opinion. I haven't read it, but what might be a very realistic and in-the-moment sort of authenticity might put someone else off.

Luckily she does not go into great detail about the rapes which is a relief for many. It's a very interesting story so far.

 

[DiO'Bolic]

Well, I ain’t no writer. But what I write here at times elicits comments from others... Some good, some bad and some ugly. I guess if I didn’t want to deal with negativity over what I write I’d keep my thoughts to myself. I figure if I put my stuff out in the public domain I should be strong enough to deal with the reactions it generates, although nobody likes to be the subject of negativity. But I’ve found an alias helps to broaden the shoulders. Or... maybe I'm just a tad obtuse.

 

[Charms7]

You’re not completely obtuse, DiO. In fact, I enjoy reading your posts very much. I have been known to get people’s dander up, or as I like to put it, ”stir the turd.” I stole that expression, doncha know? From a Tet-Mate, no less! Thank you, Tet-Mate, wherever you are!

 

[DiO'Bolic]

You’re not completely obtuse, DiO. In fact, I enjoy reading your posts very much. I have been known to get people’s dander up, or as I like to put it, ”stir the turd.” I stole that expression, doncha know? From a Tet-Mate, no less! Thank you, Tet-Mate, wherever you are!

Thanks. I enjoy reading your posts, also. And it’s not the first time me and ‘turd’ were mentioned in the same thought.

I guess if I did write a novel I’d be more afraid of the rejection letter than of the reaction from readers.

 

[do1you9love?]

Reviews are opinions. Whether they are for books, cover art, restaurants, etc., ad nauseum. You can review anything these days. I read reviews sometimes and some times I don't. I always take them with a grain of salt for the subjective reasons that you mentioned. I'm enjoying your CD reviews, for what it's worth.

 

[Dana Jean]

Reviews are opinions. Whether they are for books, cover art, restaurants, etc., ad nauseum. You can review anything these days. I read reviews sometimes and some times I don't. I always take them with a grain of salt for the subjective reasons that you mentioned. I'm enjoying your CD reviews, for what it's worth.

Thanks -- I do appreciate your time. And by doing them, it's making me actually READ all these books I have!

I'm just playing mind games with myself to stay on task. Very difficult for a hard core squirrel such as myself.

 

[Spideyman]

Excellent thoughts, Dana Jean. Often wondered how much a review might change from the original as time passes in that persons life. And agree with do1you9love? , am enjoying your reviews about CD books.

 

[Dana Jean]

Excellent thoughts, Dana Jean. Often wondered how much a review might change from the original as time passes in that persons life. And agree with do1you9love? , am enjoying your reviews about CD books.

THank you spidey. I also appreciate your time.

Oh, I have no doubt if I were to go back and re read Grapes of Wrath, I think I would have a better appreciation for the story. I have never criticized the writing -- Steinbeck threw the smack down with his mechanics and symbolism. I just hated the Joads. Damn hillbillies (and yes, I'm from a long line of hillbillies so I can call them damn hillbillies if I want too because, after all, they are my own kind.)

 

[skimom2]

I'm just curious about everyone's thoughts on this. Reviews, to me, are opinions. We all have different experiences that influence the way we see a piece of work. For instance, I loathe The Grapes of Wrath. By most, it is considered an amazing classic. So, it's all subjective. What is the maturity level at time of reading? How many interruptions did the reader experience that might influence the flow of the story? What personal life situations are coloring the read? What's one man's trash is another's work of art.

One particular work by an author or artist might be bad to me, but they can have ten other things I think are masterpieces. Or vice versa. So my opinions aren't elevating nor condemning a person's whole life and body of work. Just one aspect of it, either way.

Those who do the job of reviewer professionally are good writers. They give a synopsis of the story, and without giving spoilers, they give us their overall thoughts and feelings on the project they are reviewing. They know how to hand out criticisms and kudos with equal skill most of the time.

Then you have the joe blows of the world giving their opinions, their "reviews." And how helpful or good they are fluctuates.

I've been blabbing away my thoughts on some Cemetery Dance books, but I've had to stop and really think about these people I am talking about. The author, the artist. They are people with feelings -- that is in the back of mind, but should it be? I can get colorful with my thoughts, and sometimes they can be harsh. What is my responsibility? What is your responsibility? Should we treat every review, every comment, as a Participation Trophy with hive fives and "good jobs?" Or, is it okay to be harsh?

Why I ask all this, apparently there was a bit of a dust up on Goodreads over a book by Josh Malerman, UNBURY CAROL. His wife was very unhappy with a review he received from the average Joe, and she let this person have it!

Malerman posted an apology (I think on Goodread? Haven't gone to Goodread to check all this out, but hearing about it second hand.)

While this was unfortunate and I think it is kind of the rule of thumb with authors and artists -- you can't please everyone and you should never engage -- I understand the wife's feelings of protection. I'm guessing she watched her husband work so hard on this book, felt his joy, felt his struggle to do a good job. Family time was probably sacrificed while her husband was writing. She was a passionate champion of her husband and his work.

Also, there is another dust up between Terry Goodkind and his artist over a cover of one of his books. I will link to the story. For the record, I love the art for his cover. I think it is fantastic and NOT "laughably bad." But, maybe it didn't fit the story contained within?

'Laughably bad': Terry Goodkind apologises after insulting cover of his own book | Books | The Guardian

I don't know what I'm asking here -- should we treat these things with the old addage:

If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all?

No. Reviews are opinions, but a good reviewer is reading with an eye not to his or her own opinions of the content, but of how the writer crafts the story and it's general appeal to people who are fans of whatever genre in which the book rests.

My story: I wrote a couple of moderately successful chick lit books, so I was offered a position reviewing books for an internet review site. The catch: I was to review romance and 'Women's fiction' (oh, how I loathe that categorization, for a variety of reasons that aren't pertinent to this discussion. And I flat refused to review erotica, as most of it is simply ghastly). The problem: I don't read much American romance or women's fiction by choice. I have read some British and Irish writers in these fields and enjoyed them a lot--they create more relatable, funny stories, while Americans tend to be deadly serious.

Over the years, I have wormed my way into reviewing contemporary fiction (with the argument that if it has a family connection, it could be considered women's fiction--lol), but that is as far as I can go. SO. I read many books that would not be my personal choice of relaxation material, and I try to read them as an educated fan would. I give a lot of leeway (in terms of my personal opinion) by asking myself, "If this was my kind of book, would I enjoy this?" Then I look at writing style--is this acceptable in the genre? Does this follow generally accepted norms for quality, research, etc? Is it tonally consistent? Does it have something unique or interesting to say, or at least is it said in an interesting manner?My own opinion of most of what I review is generally a big yawn, but I can give a positive or negative review based on the guidelines mentioned above without my opinion being involved. I do try to look for at least one good thing in even the worst novel--there is usually something there--and to make any criticism constructive. If I can't find a solid example of where the writer went wrong, it's time to hush because it's just opinion at that point.

Authors answering their critics is cringeworthy, and family or friends doing it is almost as bad. If you can't take a bad review, this is not the profession to pursue. I can mention one exception, though: a friend wrote a sincere email to a writer, taking issue with the ending of one of his books and explaining why it was inconsistent with the rest of the book. This was not an attack, and she was not nasty--she was genuinely distressed. He answered her with his reasoning. She still didn't agree, but he made a lifelong, loyal fan because he responded so well. I have personally had a few discussions with writers of Twitter (this is my favorite aspect of that social platform), one quite intense, and I have to say that hearing his reasoning made me think again about my issue with the novel.

I will give you my opinion of Goodreads: I LOATHE it. Platform for bullies and sycophants.

To wrap up, it's absolutely okay to have an opinion, but you have to recognize the difference between a personal opinion and a professional review. Even then, your own opinion is the most important. Being mean online (unfocused criticism or personal attacks) is childish, though. And scary. It was a Goodreads campaign of personal attack that led me to publish under a pseudonym. When people plan to publish your home address so people can personally harass you, that's too far.

 

[Neesy]

When people plan to publish your home address so people can personally harass you, that's too far.

That's very harsh - sorry to hear that it came to that - and thanks for the heads up on Goodreads - I figured a lot of it was just drivel and won't put much stock in it from now on.

 

[skimom2]

Excellent thoughts, Dana Jean. Often wondered how much a review might change from the original as time passes in that persons life. And agree with do1you9love? , am enjoying your reviews about CD books.

This is a good question! I've had my opinion of a book change in mid review! The process of writing down what I think makes me think more deeply. Because I do review professionally, I have to be precise and review what I've written (that's the difference between what I do and an internet opinion--I HAVE to review and edit, and it goes to another editor, before it is published). I can think of at least three books where what I thought I was going to say went by the wayside as I reasoned out my response. In every case, during the review process I 'got' something the writer was aiming at that wasn't immediately apparent, and my review was much more positive than I originally thought it would be.

 

[Dana Jean]

No. Reviews are opinions, but a good reviewer is reading with an eye not to his or her own opinions of the content, but of how the writer crafts the story and it's general appeal to people who are fans of whatever genre in which the book rests.

My story: I wrote a couple of moderately successful chick lit books, so I was offered a position reviewing books for an internet review site. The catch: I was to review romance and 'Women's fiction' (oh, how I loathe that categorization, for a variety of reasons that aren't pertinent to this discussion. And I flat refused to review erotica, as most of it is simply ghastly). The problem: I don't read much American romance or women's fiction by choice. I have read some British and Irish writers in these fields and enjoyed them a lot--they create more relatable, funny stories, while Americans tend to be deadly serious.

Over the years, I have wormed my way into reviewing contemporary fiction (with the argument that if it has a family connection, it could be considered women's fiction--lol), but that is as far as I can go. SO. I read many books that would not be my personal choice of relaxation material, and I try to read them as an educated fan would. I give a lot of leeway (in terms of my personal opinion) by asking myself, "If this was my kind of book, would I enjoy this?" Then I look at writing style--is this acceptable in the genre? Does this follow generally accepted norms for quality, research, etc? Is it tonally consistent? Does it have something unique or interesting to say, or at least is it said in an interesting manner?My own opinion of most of what I review is generally a big yawn, but I can give a positive or negative review based on the guidelines mentioned above without my opinion being involved. I do try to look for at least one good thing in even the worst novel--there is usually something there--and to make any criticism constructive. If I can't find a solid example of where the writer went wrong, it's time to hush because it's just opinion at that point.

Authors answering their critics is cringeworthy, and family or friends doing it is almost as bad. If you can't take a bad review, this is not the profession to pursue. I can mention one exception, though: a friend wrote a sincere email to a writer, taking issue with the ending of one of his books and explaining why it was inconsistent with the rest of the book. This was not an attack, and she was not nasty--she was genuinely distressed. He answered her with his reasoning. She still didn't agree, but he made a lifelong, loyal fan because he responded so well. I have personally had a few discussions with writers of Twitter (this is my favorite aspect of that social platform), one quite intense, and I have to say that hearing his reasoning made me think again about my issue with the novel.

I will give you my opinion of Goodreads: I LOATHE it. Platform for bullies and sycophants.

To wrap up, it's absolutely okay to have an opinion, but you have to recognize the difference between a personal opinion and a professional review. Even then, your own opinion is the most important. Being mean online (unfocused criticism or personal attacks) is childish, though. And scary. It was a Goodreads campaign of personal attack that led me to publish under a pseudonym. When people plan to publish your home address so people can personally harass you, that's too far.

Well first off, thank you for your professional answer. I do appreciate it given I am just babbling thoughts down about what I read. I will try to incorporate more of your strategies as best I can given I'm not professional. It's hard though! I just go off the rails with the colorful stuff. And hand up in the air, I word things in a way sometimes that aren't always the best way to convey my thoughts and ideas.

Second, WOW. I cannot believe someone would publish your home address over a piece of writing. That is just beyond horrible. I'm sorry that happened to you.

 

[ghost19]

THank you spidey. I also appreciate your time.

Oh, I have no doubt if I were to go back and re read Grapes of Wrath, I think I would have a better appreciation for the story. I have never criticized the writing -- Steinbeck threw the smack down with his mechanics and symbolism. I just hated the Joads. Damn hillbillies (and yes, I'm from a long line of hillbillies so I can call them damn hillbillies if I want too because, after all, they are my own kind.)

I heard hillbilly....did you need something DJ? No? Ok, I'll just go about my rat killing....

 

[Dana Jean]

I heard hillbilly....did you need something DJ? No? Ok, I'll just go about my rat killing....

I had a great grandmother born in Walnut Hill, Arkansas, are you familiar with the place?

 

[Dana Jean]

No. Reviews are opinions, but a good reviewer is reading with an eye not to his or her own opinions of the content, but of how the writer crafts the story and it's general appeal to people who are fans of whatever genre in which the book rests.

My story: I wrote a couple of moderately successful chick lit books, so I was offered a position reviewing books for an internet review site. The catch: I was to review romance and 'Women's fiction' (oh, how I loathe that categorization, for a variety of reasons that aren't pertinent to this discussion. And I flat refused to review erotica, as most of it is simply ghastly). The problem: I don't read much American romance or women's fiction by choice. I have read some British and Irish writers in these fields and enjoyed them a lot--they create more relatable, funny stories, while Americans tend to be deadly serious.

Over the years, I have wormed my way into reviewing contemporary fiction (with the argument that if it has a family connection, it could be considered women's fiction--lol), but that is as far as I can go. SO. I read many books that would not be my personal choice of relaxation material, and I try to read them as an educated fan would. I give a lot of leeway (in terms of my personal opinion) by asking myself, "If this was my kind of book, would I enjoy this?" Then I look at writing style--is this acceptable in the genre? Does this follow generally accepted norms for quality, research, etc? Is it tonally consistent? Does it have something unique or interesting to say, or at least is it said in an interesting manner?My own opinion of most of what I review is generally a big yawn, but I can give a positive or negative review based on the guidelines mentioned above without my opinion being involved. I do try to look for at least one good thing in even the worst novel--there is usually something there--and to make any criticism constructive. If I can't find a solid example of where the writer went wrong, it's time to hush because it's just opinion at that point.

Authors answering their critics is cringeworthy, and family or friends doing it is almost as bad. If you can't take a bad review, this is not the profession to pursue. I can mention one exception, though: a friend wrote a sincere email to a writer, taking issue with the ending of one of his books and explaining why it was inconsistent with the rest of the book. This was not an attack, and she was not nasty--she was genuinely distressed. He answered her with his reasoning. She still didn't agree, but he made a lifelong, loyal fan because he responded so well. I have personally had a few discussions with writers of Twitter (this is my favorite aspect of that social platform), one quite intense, and I have to say that hearing his reasoning made me think again about my issue with the novel.

I will give you my opinion of Goodreads: I LOATHE it. Platform for bullies and sycophants.

To wrap up, it's absolutely okay to have an opinion, but you have to recognize the difference between a personal opinion and a professional review. Even then, your own opinion is the most important. Being mean online (unfocused criticism or personal attacks) is childish, though. And scary. It was a Goodreads campaign of personal attack that led me to publish under a pseudonym. When people plan to publish your home address so people can personally harass you, that's too far.

And in re reading your response here, I'm happy I have labeled my posts as "My Thoughts." That doesn't give me permission to be overly harsh, but it does differentiate what a professional reviewer does and my more stream of consciousness type posts.

And I give you credit for reading all that romance stuff to review. That would be a very hard job to do.

 

[Dana Jean]

I noticed the same thing when reading the reviews of the book about Elizabeth Smart - they said she sounded like a child. (This was on Good Reads).

I'm reading it right now and to me she sounds just fine. She even said something that made we chuckle a bit. She was 14 when she was abducted and now she's turned out to be a mature young woman. I think her faith and her family helped her to get over it.

So you're always going to get critical people who review books. I'm sorry to hear that the wife felt so bad about her husband's poor review. Can you imagine if Tabitha got upset in the beginning when many were criticizing Stephen King's books?

I think she (the wife of Josh Malerman) will have to develop a thick skin and not take everything so personally.

I will say this. I don't know what the reviewer said that was bad, I may or may not go look. BUT, this little controversy has made me want to read UNBURY CAROL. I'll make up my own mind on what I think -- a review, blurb, comment, opinion isn't going to take the place of my own ability to think for myself.

So negative attention or good attention -- UNBURY CAROL was brought to my attention by this. So, maybe it will be a good thing for Mr. Malerman.

 

[ghost19]

I had a great grandmother born in Walnut Hill, Arkansas, are you familiar with the place?

That's interesting. I am a bit familiar with that area, it's about two counties directly south of where I grew up (Pike County, AR). Lafayette County borders Louisiana if I remember correctly. I have several relatives a couple of counties to the east of there in Ashley County.