I have no problems with negative reviews. I’m interested in people’s opinions and if someone didn’t like something, it’s interesting to hear why. There are a few people whose positive reviews are enough to make me buy books, and there are some people whose negative reviews have convinced me likewise.
Coming from the low art side of the spectrum (contemporary sculpture if I want it to sound grand, designer toys if I don’t), I expected the genre community to really push the boundaries of criticism, and whilst there are a number of really great reviewers out there I find those at what genre considers the top end of the scale, to be frankly appalling.
What I cannot understand is why people would even consider approaching a review without respect for the subject matter? Respect doesn’t mean you have to like something, or hate something, it means you establish what it was trying to do and see whether it lives up to its goals.
Any attempt at art, to some greater or lesser degree, is a work of passion. Anyone who has attempted NaNoWriMo knows that writing a book is hard. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t say something is bad when it is, but I think it should always be a point of sadness. We’re not reviewing kitchen sink here, this is something someone has sunk months, if not years of their life into.
I’ve occasionally seen reviewers in the wider spectrum who look to attack things, who think that with a savage review comes credit from their peers. But all too often it just comes across as bullying. “Look at me, this thing is bad and I’m saying nasty things about it. Let’s kick it. Oh! I’m so cutting edge.” And these bullying (as opposed to ‘bad’) reviews are never over artists the outlet thinks will ever be a success. These ‘reviews’ inevitably say more about the insecurity of the reviewer than the actual piece of art. And when that happens, it stops being a review and is just a piece of vitriol.
There should always be regret when something is bad. Not an apology, no hand wringing but genuine sadness. If I see someone try hard and fail, I don’t stand there, point a finger, say “what an idiot” and laugh. If I did (and we’re all human), I’d be an arsehole. I just shake my head and say it’s a shame.
And that’s what I feel when I see some of these terribly constructed reviews. The reviewer obviously has a passion for books and has strong opinions that would benefit the whole community, that *could* be a point of discussion. They, more often than not, can obviously write and could be of real benefit to the genre community. But instead the debate ends up about the review instead of the book and I mentally blacklist the reviewer and the relevant publication.
Maybe a bad book did stop a good one being published, maybe it missed an opportunity to be something better, maybe the prose IS terrible or maybe, just maybe, other people will disagree. The best reviews create debate about the thing they are reviewing, the worst create debate about the review.
I don’t know what happened to make some of these reviewers so bitter. Jealousy of the author’s success, a misguided thought that this will make a name for themselves? I wouldn’t accept racism, homophobia or anti-Semitism in a review, so why should I accept bullying? Surely, in the 21st century, we’re better than that? It genuinely shocks me that the genre community believes that type of behaviour is acceptable in this day and age.
Seriously, people, it’s not hard to write an honest review!
Figures Great post! I couldn’t agree more.
The best criticism of a review, criticizes the review, not the reviewer.
If you have an issue with it, go for the points made therein, not some imagined tone. Or lack of gentleness. Certainly don’t start by calling the reviewer envious, mean spirited, and unprofessional. Most of all, don’t call someone a bully for stating their opinion about what they’ve reviewed as a bad book, however negative their review may be. That’s my take on this.
Personally, the review is funny, skilled, and professional. I see no personal attacks on the author, only their work and a very worthwhile and serious question, however humorously framed, raised about the wisdom or practice of mainstream publishers putting out works which stumble as badly as this one does.
Of course the answer lies in that they sell, and that’s fine. But there is nothing dishonest or unprofessional about raising this issue.
Nor is there any evidence of bullying, except, in the comments which show the underbelly of fandom at its very worst.
So, while I appreciate your effort to expand the dialogue, I completely disagree and feel the evidence in this case does as well, with your argument.
With that said, and as ever, my absolutely non-bullying best wishes!
One last point. It could be seen quite easily, that by saying it’s not hard to write an honest review, you are accusing the writer of the SH review, of being dishonest.
This seems either like you’re not thinking it through, or you are doing something rather unjust – assuming that what this person has gone to some effort to write and publish, is somehow completely dishonest. In other words, you’re doing almost exactly what you’re accusing the reviewer of doing, only based on a even smaller ‘sample’ than they had to work with.
Dangerous ground to end on.
Bully who? The author? If you’re writing reviews aimed at the author of the book, then you’re doing it wrong.
Eric,
your comments are most welcome. I deliberately did not identify the review that started all this because I have no ill feeling toward the reviewer and feel that comments ‘over there’ have got nasty and personal. Plus, this is the latest in a long line of reviews from this publication that have caused controversy. Pointing fingers and naming names, IMHO, would cloud the point I was trying to make.
You make a fair point on the perception of my last comment. I don’t read it that way, but see how it might. I’ll let it stand, rather than try to rewrite as these comments should act as a coda.
I have to be honest I don’t find the review funny, in much the same vein as I don’t find homophobic comedians funny. I realise that the previous sentence could be read as me sensationalising or trying to inject undue gravitas, but I have to be honest and say that’s the same level of shock and horror I honestly feel every time I see one of these reviews. The wit comes across as showy to me, someone trying so hard that the review almost becomes second place.
There’s a comment by Adam Roberts (sorry to single him out but I feel it unfair to use it without accreditation) that I really disagree with: “A review is a piece of writing, like any other; and like any other is has a duty to be entertaining”. Surely the duty is to inform, any entertainment value is a pleasant extra. The review in question comes across (at least to me) entirely too showy as if it belongs in a writing portfolio labelled “clever, bad review”. That’s largely due to the first sentence, the way the self-publishing success is described as “moderate” and the use of the verb ‘parlay’. And in doing so, I have to wonder (with the greatest respect to the reviewer who has had an awful time of it) whether the review was born out of the book selection or the book selection born out of the type of review they wanted to write. The latter is dishonest and the origin of my final comment.
There was a fantastic negative review in the Guardian recently. I wish I could find the link. Ahh, I have: http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2000/oct/05/guardianweekly.guardianweekly11
I want to point out this response by SMD
http://wisb.blogspot.com/2012/01/bad-bully-reviewer-manifesto-or-why.html
It disagrees with me, but it is reasoned and well-written, and therefore I have no qualms about pointing readers towards it
And Ian, I am not ignoring your comment. I think it begs a question, as in “In considering art, should we also consider the artist”. I’ll admit to having a number of conflicting opinions on this and my thinking isn’t sufficiently granular to be able to answer just yet. Perhaps the subject of a future blog post?
@Edwards The reviewer in question has had occasion to apologise for personal attacks on an author in a previous review. But any consideration of her tone and speculation on her motivations is verboten? I don’t think so.
Try Dear Genre, Bullying Reviewers Is Very Uncomely! Reading that comment thread, if anyone is getting bullied it’s the reviewer, simply for giving her honest opinion about a book she thought was rubbish.
Such hassle of reviewers is a growing problem, and one likely to get worse rather than better, as the indie author / Authonomy culture continues to bump up against the first serious critics to actually read their books.
“The best reviews create debate about the thing they are reviewing, the worst create debate about the review.”
In my experience, the response to a review has nothing at all to do with the quality of the review, but rather on how well the author can take criticism, and how invested the author’s family and friends are in their career.
“I don’t know what happened to make some of these reviewers so bitter. Jealousy of the author’s success, a misguided thought that this will make a name for themselves? I wouldn’t accept racism, homophobia or anti-Semitism in a review, so why should I accept bullying? Surely, in the 21st century, we’re better than that? It genuinely shocks me that the genre community believes that type of behaviour is acceptable in this day and age.”
It shocks me that you believe comparing a scathing review to homophobia, racism and anti-semitism is anything like rational or, you know, anything but “fucking ridiculous.” Judging from your photo you certainly have never experienced racism, so I’ll ask: have you ever actually been subjected to homophobia or anti-semitism?
The whole “she’s just bitter and jealous” makes you sound like a schoolchild, by the way.
[…] asshat, Adrian Faulkner, cried about bullying: What I cannot understand is why people would even consider approaching a review without respect […]
The best reviews create debate about the thing they are reviewing, the worst create debate about the review.
I disagree. I think there’s plenty of interesting conversations to be had discussing the meta question of reader responses to books. “She’s so meeeean, it’s just like racism!”, though, isn’t one of them.
Seriously, people, it’s not hard to write an honest review!
The above was just silly; this is offensive. So the review was not honest? You think she was lying about what she thought about the book? Based on what evidence?
It is astonishing to me that so many people are determined to explain (or perhaps mansplain…) to the reviewer why she didn’t respond to the book in the way she says she did: it couldn’t be that it was bad, it was must be that she was jealous/malicious/trying to shock. Please.
Nic – Eric raised some good points on the last sentence that are in-line with yours and I’ve commented on above.
RequiresHate – I’ve never directly accused Bourke, the article was born out of several such incidents. Besides, I think the way some people have attacked her personally is terrible. I’ve aimed to be respectful all times. I disagree with the way she approached things but I think she is capable of writing a good review. I hope I made that clear in the article.
Just because I’ve never experienced racism doesn’t mean that I don’t find it abhorrent. I experience prejudice on a near daily basis but I don’t believe that qualifies me any better than someone who doesn’t. I’ve seen the damage bullying can do, and yes this is only a review, but why should I sit still and let it pass? We explain it away as if it doesn’t matter. If a reviewer was racist in a review (ad this is NOT an accusation) we’d be up in arms. Where do we draw the line? I suspect as is evidenced from the debate, it’s different for different people.
I think the other points are covered in my response to Eric
In short, I have no issue with the main points raised in the review, but I found the tone of it offensive (I have neither read the work in question nor had any intention of doing so)
Oh sit down. A scathing review is NOT anything like institutional oppression perpetrated systematically. Like homophobia and racism and, just so you know, I’ve experienced both firsthand–on levels both personal and systematic. So I don’t give a shit if you, white man, find racism “abhorrent.” I give exactly precisely zero shits. You are confusing “someone is being mean on the internet!” with things that have a lengthy history of oppression and horror (including denial of legal rights, basic rights, and murder) behind them. When you start doing that? Step back and reevaluate your opinions, because your comparison is both false and offensive, a fact you seem incapable of realizing. Or you can shut up, that’ll work too.
The only “bullying” that’s happening is the hordes of turds attacking Bourke at a personal level… something which you, by the way, have contributed to by questioning motives, ascribing malice and jealousy to “mean reviewers.” Are you twelve?
Requireshate – I don’t mind you disagreeing with me (as vehemently as you like), but I have to be honest and say, if you can’t approach it respectfully all that will happen is we’ll both think each other idiots and nether will come away any richer. If you believe I need to re-evaluate my opinions, do so with reasoned debate not couched in provocative terms (even if you think I’ve been insulting).
It would be a shame if you just decide to troll. Underneath your trolling, you appear to have real intelligence and could really add to the discussion
“Seriously, people, it’s not hard to write an honest review!”
I’d suggest that labelling apparently honest reviewers as bitter, dishonest, jealous, insecure bullies might make it more difficult..!
That line aside, your post reads like a plea for *less* honesty in reviews, not more, for reviewers to hold back their harshest criticisms for fear of hurting the author’s feelings. I don’t think they should. The review should reflect the writer’s true feelings about the book in question.
There’s been plenty of time now for anyone who thinks Liz Bourke’s review is unfair or dishonest to download the Kindle preview of the book and read some of it to decide for themselves. I have – and while I didn’t hate what I read as much as she did, it wasn’t good, and was just as clumsily written as she said. Her review certainly seems to fall within the range of reasonable responses to it.
But Adrian, you were never respectful to people who do have to deal with racism: you trivialize it, you compare it to something that’s frankly beneath discussion and very, very petty. A mean review versus historical, daily, and institutional oppression. Stop clutching your pearls and focusing on your own feelings of hurt for one single minute, and think about that. Think. On. It.
What you are doing is speaking from a position where you are accustomed to demanding (and receiving) the privilege of politeness: http://theangryblackwoman.com/2008/02/12/the-privilege-of-politeness/ You know that joke? “People tell me I’m white and I believe them because a police officer calls me ‘sir.'” You believe that politeness toward you is your god-given, unalienable right, no matter how much you’ve offended the other party. Because you are used to being on top; you are used to people being deferential to you because you are white and a man. You are used to a culture which dismisses concerns of people who aren’t like you–women, people of color–as “provocative” or “too angry” or “disrespectful” and “uppity.” Some of them being words you’ve yourself thrown out: you will deny all these of course, because you probably see yourself as a swell, enlightened liberal guy, not someone steeped in privilege, someone who benefits daily from racism.
But guess what, not all of us will be nice and sweet to you. Not everyone will obey that obligation. You spat on me and you expect me to politely, gently explain to you–the spit still warm–why spitting on people is a bad thing, because apparently Daddy didn’t teach you that you don’t do it to people you want to treat you nicely. The extent of your lack of understanding (why it’s not okay to compare a scathing review to racism) is astounding, and it’s not a comparison most people who do have to deal with racism will ever draw. And, of course, because you continue to miss the offensive connotations of your discourse, you continue to talk down to a person of color “well, you appear to have some real intelligence underneath all that…” So yes, I’ll be quite vitriolic toward you, here and elsewhere, because that is what you deserve. Neither your opinion–let alone the way in which you express it–is something that merits respect.
Now go unpack your knapsack: http://ted.coe.wayne.edu/ele3600/mcintosh.html
I think we are deferring from the original argument. If in saying that bullying rates as one of the things I abhor I have offended you, then I apologise.
I thank you for the links. I will read them with genuine interest
“If in saying that bullying rates as one of the things I abhor I have offended you, then I apologise.”
Oh, wow. I think I now see why you are calling “mean” reviewers jealous and bitter–you don’t react to what people say; instead you choose to react to whatever convenient straw man you believe they have said.
I’m not offended because you said you abhor bullying. I’m offended because you trivialize racism (and possibly homophobia and anti-semitism if you haven’t experienced either–yes, having actually experienced the thing does, in fact, matter: proclaiming how much you abhor it doesn’t, contrary to your apparent belief, absolve you and automatically make you a good, moral person) and refuse to either acknowledge why that is problematic, or acknowledge that you should apologize for that instead of an imaginary offense nobody gives a shit about. Way to be a privilege-denying dude.
I think she is capable of writing a good review
Well, there’s arrogance for you. Perhaps that “good” review is one of the others she’s written for Strange Horizons; or perhaps it’s one of her reviews on Tor.com.
Liz Bourke thought the book was rubbish. She argued her point, and she provided context and quotes to support her argument. If only more people could frame a review as well, or were as honest when it came to the books they reviewed.