Authors should never respond to reviews?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
No, I'm attempting to explain why I have a disinclination to always discuss my opinions, and to expand on your view that it's a bad idea to comment in case the person is emotionally fragile and you end up looking mean.

As a woman, responses to things I say sometimes start with an insult directed at me. It's something else authors (or those with privilege) should take into account when responding: are your words going to sound combative?

If you are the author, are you going to have a hundred people reading your comments to this person and taking it upon themselves to respond too?


I don't deny women have a harder time of it in public spaces, but I still fail to see how this relates to authors in general commenting on reviews. Female authors are probably more likely to catch flack; female reviewers are more likely to incur verbal abuse. I think that argues for being careful of the language you use, but you seem to be trying to make a leap from that to "Therefore you shouldn't post anything that might conceivably be upsetting to anyone because some people are women."


It sounded churlish, a hands on hips "Well, *hair toss* I've never heard of her".

That sounds like an interpretation you've read into a simple comment.

The fact that people can read such things into simple comments is a good reason for authors to step carefully. But it's a not a good reason to say that comments from authors are defacto bad, invasive, and rude.
 

Krystal Heart

Sockpuppet
Banned
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
238
Reaction score
13
Location
Florida
Personally, it doesn't matter to me as a writer how many positive or negative reviews are left in my book page because I wouldn't read them. I would be too busy writing my next book. I realize not everyone's going to like my book, but then again, there'll be always at least 1 person out there who will like it, so even if I got all negative and disparaging reviews on my piece, it wouldn't matter, and if I'm not reading the reviews, naturally, I can't respond to them. I agree with those that say that an author responding to a review can put readers off and I add some readers might deem this approach unprofessional.
 

meowzbark

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
142
Location
Arizona
Well, since it's on topic, let me ask this: I really really want to respond to this blog article, I think it's a hilarious blog entry about my book and I want to be part of the conversation. Do you think it'd be okay to do so, if I keep it humorous? (I looked for an email address so I could contact the blogger, but couldn't see one).

What do you think, yea or nay?

You could always tweet the post and @ the reviewer. That shows that you like it without being too intrusive.
 

Theo81

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,288
Reaction score
376
Website
www.atrivialblogforseriouspeople.blogspot.com
[/COLOR]

I don't deny women have a harder time of it in public spaces, but I still fail to see how this relates to authors in general commenting on reviews. Female authors are probably more likely to catch flack; female reviewers are more likely to incur verbal abuse. I think that argues for being careful of the language you use, but you seem to be trying to make a leap from that to "Therefore you shouldn't post anything that might conceivably be upsetting to anyone because some people are women."

I'm not trying to make that leap.

You said (with the same bolding I applied to it before):

Your issues with author participation are certainly something authors who feel inclined to comment on reviews should take into account - along with all the other hazards of authors commenting on reviews (you might come off looking like either an ass or a suck-up), there are psychologically fragile people who will flip out and make you look mean.

So I said:

Theo81 said:
Or, there are people who lack your gender privilege and whose opinions are conflated with their appearance, weight, marital status, or sexual appetite, among other things.

I might easily have said other things:

1) Or, there are people who have been blogging about their father being ill and who are just taking a 5 minute breather.
2) Or, there are people who are 14 and who may feel a conversation is an adult taking umbrage with them.

It all means the same thing: it is not about you (the author). Your book is 3-5 days of my leisure time - nothing more. Authors who feel inclined to comment on a review should take into account that I have a life they know nothing about but which will colour how I receive and interpret that comment and the impact it will have on me.


The reason I cited gender privilege is because that's what I was thinking when I mentioned not always having the strength to say what I mean, and because of this:

As a reader, I don't want to be infantilized by the presumption that I'm tee-heeing with my fellow readers over a book and the sudden appearance of an Author is invading my safe space.

You may find the idea of a safe space patronising, other people find it necessary.

I am against the author wading into something they are not, reasonably, part of. I think a GR review by somebody who hasn't done anything more than read the book and leave an opinion of it is something the author is not reasonably part of.

You say it's a bad idea because the author will come out of it looking bad. I say it's a bad idea because it crosses the boundaries of what the other person wants. Before you post on a review as an author, consider that you don't know this person, you don't know who they are, what they want, what they are comfortable with; you don't know if they've had a shit day and your slightly ambiguous comment is going to be the weight which drags them off the wagon, or if they're going to be thrilled you've commented and it becomes the start of a lifelong mentorship culminating in their dedicating their Nobel Prize for Literature to you.

My leap is: "Therefore, you shouldn't post anything to somebody who isn't trying to have a conversation. It's wrong to force somebody to interact with something just because you want them to or want to address what they've said. It's a rare instance that it actually matters. If they were having a face-to-face conversation, you wouldn't know anything about it."



That sounds like an interpretation you've read into a simple comment.

The fact that people can read such things into simple comments is a good reason for authors to step carefully. But it's a not a good reason to say that comments from authors are defacto bad, invasive, and rude.

Could be.

The entire author comment was 5 words:

"I've never heard of her."

I find it difficult to see this as any kind of conversation and I don't see a good reason for the author to make it. It's not even a pleasantry, but neither is it big deal enough for me to mention the specifics of here.

As I've said previously, I'm against it as an abstract concept, but I'm not going to stone people for doing so.
 

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
Authors who feel inclined to comment on a review should take into account that I have a life they know nothing about but which will colour how I receive and interpret that comment and the impact it will have on me.

That applies to anything anyone posts anywhere.

You may find the idea of a safe space patronising, other people find it necessary.

I do not find the idea of safe spaces patronizing. I find the idea of making all spaces safe spaces patronizing. Declared safe spaces are certainly necessary for some people; they should be clearly labeled as such. You can't demand that all public venues you participate in be treated as safe spaces.

I am against the author wading into something they are not, reasonably, part of.

They are reasonably part of book discussions.

You say it's a bad idea because the author will come out of it looking bad. I say it's a bad idea because it crosses the boundaries of what the other person wants.

You are making an assumption that your preferences are universal.

It is not reasonable to say that an author commenting on a book review is by default a violation of boundaries; that is not a normal expectation in the social sphere of the Internet. If you, as an individual, tell authors not to comment on your reviews, your wishes should be respected. But Goodreads is a public social network that very obviously and openly invites readers and authors to interact.
 

WendyN

8-armed cyborg tree
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
1,904
Reaction score
181
Location
in the mountain's shadow
I have a book review blog, and I've often had authors comment on my reviews. There was only one that left me feeling a bit prickly, when my expectations for what a novel was going to be obviously weren't the same as what the author intended. Overall, though, I try to be polite in my critiques and always write with the assumption that the author could be reading it (it is the internet, after all), and most of my interactions with authors have been positive.

I hadn't really considered what I'd do if the tables were turned and I were the author reading a review... though this conversation definitely has made me think about it now.
 

Axordil

Is this thing on?
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
218
Reaction score
14
Location
Black Creek Bottoms, MO
Website
jeffreyhowe.wordpress.com
ETA: by "people" I don't mean authors.

Why does this remind me of the line from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead:

We're actors. We're the opposite of people.

:D

I am not sure I can express the trepidation I feel about Goodreads. I find myself exerting a lot of self-restraint in what I review. Works by friends? Nope, not sure I can do it accurately without pissing them off. Works I don't like by well-known authors in my genre? Nope, same thing, somewhat different set of repercussions.

Of course, not reviewing stuff my friends write has a cost too. "Why aren't you supporting me?" "Because reviews by friends aren't support, they're easily spotted fluff." That doesn't always go down well.

When my novel sells (positive thoughts! positive thoughts!) it's only going to feel like more of a minefield. I'm starting to think I should back out of the site entirely or stop using my real name there. And I hate that feeling.

ETA: Or I could limit my reviews to dead authors. That's safer. Not safe. But safer.
 
Last edited:

WendyN

8-armed cyborg tree
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
1,904
Reaction score
181
Location
in the mountain's shadow
When my novel sells (positive thoughts! positive thoughts!) it's only going to feel like more of a minefield. I'm starting to think I should back out of the site entirely or stop using my real name there. And I hate that feeling.

ETA: Or I could limit my reviews to dead authors. That's safer. Not safe. But safer.

I've thought of this as well. It's one of the reasons I want to come up with a pen name. I enjoy reviewing books and would like to keep doing so, but don't want it to become a tit-for-tat kind of thing w/ other authors.
 

Theo81

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,288
Reaction score
376
Website
www.atrivialblogforseriouspeople.blogspot.com
They are reasonably part of book discussions.

I disagree with this. I'm not giving my opinion of the author (hopefully; if I am it's because I'm on a rant), I'm giving my opinion of the book and my response to it as a reader.




It is not reasonable to say that an author commenting on a book review is by default a violation of boundaries; that is not a normal expectation in the social sphere of the Internet. If you, as an individual, tell authors not to comment on your reviews, your wishes should be respected. But Goodreads is a public social network that very obviously and openly invites readers and authors to interact.

And this, again, is a basic point on which we have opposing views (and not only about GR making reader/author interaction obviously part of the site - I've got it telling me to add friends, take a quiz and explore listopia). The author is not just some person who is reading the review: they are the author. I'm not putting my opinion up to share with them, I'm putting it up to share with the other people who have had my experience, or not my experience. The author can never be the reader of their book. I am not going to be able to have the discussion I'm looking for with them: the experience of a reader. If you'll forgive one more analogy: an atheist doesn't have a place in a conversation about which bible translation is the closest to God's words.

If there is no reason on the authors part to suppose the reviewer *wants* to interact with them, whether it's a blog, or GR, Amazon, wherever, I think it's bad form to make the first move - I don't think the reviewer should have to state it.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. :)
 

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
3,781
Age
50
Location
MA
Website
www.rebeccaburrell.com
I disagree with this. I'm not giving my opinion of the author (hopefully; if I am it's because I'm on a rant), I'm giving my opinion of the book and my response to it as a reader.
Somewhat tangential, but you seem to be claiming a right to include the author in your discussion of his or her book while simultaneously preventing that individual from taking part in a discussion of his or her book - this hardly seems fair to me, or at least a double standard.

If you'll forgive one more analogy: an atheist doesn't have a place in a conversation about which bible translation is the closest to God's words.
Why not? The atheist might have something valuable to offer - maybe he or she has knowledge of Greek or Aramaic and can offer insight on how a translation has changed over the years. Etc. I think it's a fine analogy, but I don't agree with your conclusion.

The situation is different on a blog, but on an open forum like GR, I don't think the reviewer has a right to decide who comments on a review they post, so long as its within the terms of service. You may not like it, and that's your right, but once it's out there, it's out there.
 

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
If you'll forgive one more analogy: an atheist doesn't have a place in a conversation about which bible translation is the closest to God's words.


I'd forgive it if it weren't a completely nonsensical analogy to this situation.
 

Mharvey

Liker Of Happy Things
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,861
Reaction score
234
Location
The Nexus
It's kinda funny, I'm so used to rejection at this point, when I finally make it as a writer... I think any review telling me how terrible my novel is will be like: "Dude, I was tempered by the fires of Query Hell. Compared to the squirrels there, you're amateur hour. Thanks for the review. Don't forget to tip your editor."
 

shadowwalker

empty-nester!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
5,601
Reaction score
598
Location
SE Minnesota
Yeahhhh... kinda wondering whether or not it will be another place to find SP authors cheerleading other SP authors. Or maybe I'm too cynical...
 

Axordil

Is this thing on?
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
218
Reaction score
14
Location
Black Creek Bottoms, MO
Website
jeffreyhowe.wordpress.com
A lot would depend on its business model, about which exactly zippo is said on the Kickstarter page. Where will the funds to keep it going come from? Ad revenue? Premium memberships? Subscriptions?
 

frimble3

Heckuva good sport
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
11,574
Reaction score
6,396
Location
west coast, canada
Yeahhhh... kinda wondering whether or not it will be another place to find SP authors cheerleading other SP authors. Or maybe I'm too cynical...
Well, you're apparently no more cynical than I am. And who are these people who can't find books to read on their own?

I know people who have TBR lists that will take them most of their lives to work through, if they started reading today. If you only read in a particular niche, then you only need to check out a few specific places, a general site probably won't help much, and if you'll read pretty much anything, well, those are everywhere.
I'm guessing most of the interest (especially the paying interest) is from authors.
 

frimble3

Heckuva good sport
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
11,574
Reaction score
6,396
Location
west coast, canada
Why does this remind me of the line from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead:

We're actors. We're the opposite of people.

:D

I am not sure I can express the trepidation I feel about Goodreads. I find myself exerting a lot of self-restraint in what I review. Works by friends? Nope, not sure I can do it accurately without pissing them off. Works I don't like by well-known authors in my genre? Nope, same thing, somewhat different set of repercussions.

Of course, not reviewing stuff my friends write has a cost too. "Why aren't you supporting me?" "Because reviews by friends aren't support, they're easily spotted fluff." That doesn't always go down well.

When my novel sells (positive thoughts! positive thoughts!) it's only going to feel like more of a minefield. I'm starting to think I should back out of the site entirely or stop using my real name there. And I hate that feeling.

ETA: Or I could limit my reviews to dead authors. That's safer. Not safe. But safer.
Let us recall the Good Old Days, when all a reader had to do was read books. There was no homework, no assumption that you would do a book report, and certainly no thought that it would be graded.
 

Theo81

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,288
Reaction score
376
Website
www.atrivialblogforseriouspeople.blogspot.com
Somewhat tangential, but you seem to be claiming a right to include the author in your discussion of his or her book while simultaneously preventing that individual from taking part in a discussion of his or her book - this hardly seems fair to me, or at least a double standard.

But... but... I just *said* it: I'm not giving my opinion of the author. Other things I'm not doing: discussing the author; discussing something other than my response to the book.

The parenthesis should have had a smiley on them because it was tongue in cheek, apologies for not making that clearer. However, if somebody *was* discussing the author, doesn't that fall under "Don't Respond To Negative Reviews"?

(I am making the assumption that a discussion doesn't happen because the review reads "I loved everything about this book and the author is now my God. I'm off to sacrifice a goat.")


Why not? The atheist might have something valuable to offer - maybe he or she has knowledge of Greek or Aramaic and can offer insight on how a translation has changed over the years. Etc. I think it's a fine analogy, but I don't agree with your conclusion.

That the author can never have a readers response of their own book? (I won't go into the analogy because it's a derail too far, but it makes perfect sense to me)

The situation is different on a blog, but on an open forum like GR, I don't think the reviewer has a right to decide who comments on a review they post, so long as its within the terms of service. You may not like it, and that's your right, but once it's out there, it's out there.

It's not about the *right* to decide - everybody has a right to do anything. If you want to come round to my house get stabby, that's your right as a person who lives in a free country. I'll be cross, but that's neither here nor there.

Authors have the *right* to comment on negative reviews but I think we're all agreed it's a bad idea and they shouldn't do it.

I think it was actually in the post which prompted this thread I said that if I didn't want it to be *read*, I'd set the whole thing to private. If the author wants to comment, it's a free country, but I think it's bad form to do so when it's clear the person who wrote the review has no interest in author interaction. And, as I also said, I don't want to know if the author is reading my opinion because a) my opinion is worth nothing b) I don't care what the author thinks of my opinion and c) I find it inhibiting - I don't always want to have to be extra careful about what I say just in case somebody unexpected reads the review. (I think it's an odd thing to seek out reviews to read because they aren't for authors, they're for readers).
 

Cramp

Pain in the writing wrist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
688
Reaction score
72
Location
UK
Theo81 said:
(I think it's an odd thing to seek out reviews to read because they aren't for authors, they're for readers).

I can understand the desire to see how the work that one may have spent years of their life slaving over has affected the people who have read it. Sure, looking at sales figures is nice, but its got no content to it. Can't see what people liked or disliked and so on. There's that aspect of recognition to it. Feels like it's sending your manuscript to someone to read, getting a note saying they received it and then hearing nothing.

If you've ever written fanfiction - there is a difference between putting up a new piece and watching the view counter rise but getting nothing in the way of comments, and a few views but comments. (It doesn't quite fit because the comments tend to be geared towards the author, but I think the feeling is the same).
 

Buffysquirrel

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
6,137
Reaction score
694
Yes, and I think the invitation to authors is not entirely synchronized with the expectations of established users, especially given the clumsy spamming of inexperienced authors priming the snark-pump.

GR is undergoing a difficult transition, I think--and one that a lot of people there don't want. It will be interesting to see the shape of the site once the dust settles.
 

shadowwalker

empty-nester!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
5,601
Reaction score
598
Location
SE Minnesota
In fanfiction (and I'm a veteran of that arena) authors are expected to respond to comments. Fan/author interaction is integral to fanfiction. But I'll also state that authors who behave badly are also looked on negatively.

But this is not fanfiction. This is 'real world' and if I review a book, I want other readers to engage. The author had his/her say in the book. Now it belongs to the readers.
 

Buffysquirrel

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
6,137
Reaction score
694
I find myself in a cleft stick here. While I agree whole-heartedly that reviews are for readers, and that the book now belongs to them, and the author's had their say, I also believe GR invited the authors in and gave the impression they were welcome to engage with the readers. It's a situation where expectations on both sides may well be so different that clashes are inevitable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.