Be nice
I sat down at my computer tonight intending to write about general writing tips, but thought I'd breeze over to Twitter first, just in case I was missing out on ground-breaking news. Like, you know, Borders filing for bankruptcy. I could wax poetic on my feelings on that subject, but since I'm an author and a reader, I figure my stance is probably pretty obvious. But back to the subject at hand. Before starting this post, I swung by Twitter and discovered a link to a blog Lilith Saintcrow wrote in September 2006 on why the hard sell doesn't work. She gave several excellent tips on breaking into the publishing industry, and if that's your goal, I'd highly recommend reading the entire post. Here's a link. One part of her post in particular stood out to me, and I'm going to quote it here:
“Publishing is really a small business. You never know when the person you’re rude to on a convention panel or in an elevator at a trade show may hold the power of life or death over your wee manuscript in the future. It’s best to be tactful and interested in other people at cons and shows, not to mention writer’s group meetings.” --Lilith Saintcrow
Publishing is a small business. Simply put, everyone knows everyone. Instead of the “Six degrees of Kevin Bacon” we play the “Six degrees of Julie Strauss-Gabel.”
But back to writing tips. Since I turned SILENCE in to my editor last week, I've been playing catch-up with my email. One of the most popular questions I'm seeing is some form of this: “I'm an aspiring author and I was wondering if you could share tips on writing and breaking into the industry?”
This is a tough question to answer. I always feel like I need more information before I can give a solid answer. Often, I want to write back with a few questions of my own. Are you an aspiring author with a seed of an idea, or do you have a finished manuscript? Are you part of a critique group, and have the members given you feedback on your manuscript? Do you know what a query letter is? (It's fine if you don't, it just means my answer will be different.) Do you have an agent?
Regardless of the answers to these questions, I think there is one piece of advice that is universal, no matter where you find yourself on the path to publication. And that is: be nice. Be courteous. Be generous. As Lilith Saintcrow says, Be tactful. Be interested.
Be humble.
Let me tell you a story. In the weeks leading up to HUSH, HUSH's publication, I thought reading early reviews of the book would be helpful. Or maybe I didn't even think that. Maybe it all boiled down to simple curiosity. But whatever the reason, I frequently visited Goodreads and Amazon, determined to learn what people thought of my book. As you might expect, there were glowing reviews, mediocre reviews, and scathing reviews. One particular review that fell into the latter category caught my eye. I stewed over it for a few days, and eventually forgot about it.
Fast forward several months. An email arrived from an editor asking if I'd be interested in reading a manuscript. If you're two steps ahead, you might have already guessed that the author of the manuscript was none other than the author of the scathing review I had, up until this point, forgotten about. The editor introduced herself and made the comment that her author adored HUSH, HUSH and would love if I'd read her book with an eye toward writing a blurb. It was an awkward situation, to say the least. In the end, I did the only thing I felt appropriate: I laughed it off, then politely informed the editor I was swamped and unable to read the manuscript, but thanked her for thinking of me.
You might think I turned down reading the manuscript out of revenge or to give the author the finger, so to speak. I hope I'm not that petty. The reason I decided not to read the manuscript was because I wondered what would happen if I did read it...and loved it. What if I sent the editor a handful of glowing words, and she decided to stick them on the front cover of her author's book? Would the author love having my praise splashed on her cover? Probably not. In the end, I decided to take the higher road and let the author breathe easy. (It didn't slip my mind that the ultimate revenge would have been making sure my name got on the cover of her book. But again. Higher road. Always the better path.)
Interestingly enough, this once-aspiring author didn't limit her somewhat rantish reviews to HUSH, HUSH. She'd made quite a habit of belittling authors' books along the way, and I suppose it comes to no surprise that, as far as I know, she was never able to find an author to blurb her book. This isn't to say an aspiring author can't be honest when writing reviews, but if your goal is to be published, it might serve you well to drop the books you don't love, and talk up the ones you do. You don't have to love every book, every time. But I think a bit of courtesy in saying, “This wasn't for me, and here's why,” says volumes about you as a reviewer and a person. No one wants to start their career surrounded by nothing but a lot of burned bridges.
Whether you believe in karma, the Golden Rule, or the old saying, “What goes around comes around,” all have stood the test of time. If you want agents, editors and authors to respect you, take the first step. Extend kind words. Talk up books you love. Be polite and respectful at conferences. Attend author book signings. All of these things will go along way.
So, yes. That's my writing tip of the day. Be nice.
Melissa, I think the irony of you liking this post is lost on you.
The Holy Terror wrote: "Melissa, I think the irony of you liking this post is lost on you."Isn't it hilarious? But what do you expect from her?
Okay, but here's the thing. There's no wrong way to express an opinion. Period. If my opinion happens to include various obscenities which are necessary to expressing my precise feelings, I'm going to take Mark Twain's advice ("The difference between the right word and the almost-right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug") and use the precise word I need. If it happens to be both disrespectful and the best expression of that opinion, well, the opinion comes first, particularly since opinions which require the word 'fuck' rarely are expressed regarding people for whom I hold any respect at all. (Unless it's in the superlative sense of 'fucking awesome', I guess.)I think the primary ideological difference between you and I, and between you and lots of other commenters on this thread, is that we believe that the expression of a consumer's opinion should never impact their professional prospects, either in a good or bad way. Unless they're being paid, reviewers should neither benefit nor be harmed by the industry's reaction to their reviews. Being nice has its place, but if anyone censors their reviews because they're afraid of repercussions or trying to kiss up, they're not fulfilling the purpose of a review - thereby doing a disservice to other consumers, who may look at that review to decide if they want to buy the product, and also to the producers who are deprived of truly honest feedback on their product.
It's fine, of course, if you prefer to read and write what you define as 'professional' reviews; that's your prerogative and as long as you feel you can adequately express your opinions within those bounds it harms no one. The issue many people found in Fitzpatrick's post is that it seems to suggest that everyone, even those who feel writing with an emphasis on 'professionalism' first would amount to censorship, should do so because otherwise no one will help them if they ever get published.
It reads in that sense as a threat to the reviewer - 'Be Nice or else...' and an attempt to squash vocally negative reviews in general.
I think you confuse Goodreads with book blogging. They're different things. Some Goodreads reviewers are also book bloggers, but most of us are not and ergo aren't affected by the concerns that someone hoping to participate in a blog tour might have to deal with. A book blog also has a different audience - I think I may have explained this to you in a message before, but most people I know on Goodreads assume their primary audience is one of other readers, not of authors or publishers. In fact, the debate over how much authors should communicate with readers on this site is a ferocious one, and one which isn't likely to be resolved any time soon. A book blogger, by contrast, must assume that their reviews might be read by authors and publishers, and in that case yes, professionalism might come into play. And yes, book bloggers get free books, but again - that's not Goodreads. Goodreads giveaways are random and not contingent on professionalism of reviews. Also, I'm sorry if I misunderstood, but your comment about professionalism 'opening doors' and 'making friends' does imply kissing up for an advantage in the industry. Probably what you meant is that professionalism doesn't close doors or make enemies, which is true, but the idea that it opens doors/makes friends implies an industry which is closed to start with, and to which one must be kind before it will return the favor. Basically, to me at least, it implies that the publishing industry only helps people who help it first, not that it helps those who don't hurt it. Does that make sense? It's mostly semantics, yes, but important because the gulf between what you probably meant and what I read is vast.
As far as 'common decency' goes, that's true. It's important to be polite to one's fellow human beings. But isn't it also important, if one feels a book has a dangerous message, to say so? If an author chooses to write something that is, say, homophobic or racist, don't we as readers (even we as a society) have a responsibility to point that out, stridently if necessary? We are not a civilization which practices censorship, as a whole (I believe/hope, at least) so objecting to ideas we find reprehensible is our greatest tool. It's like advertising (apologies for the tangent but I just watched the latest Killing Us Softly documentary a couple of days ago): sexualizing products may dehumanize people or feed them unhealthy messages, but as long as those products keep selling the advertising will continue. The consumers, the people, have to stand up and express themselves through the market and, since it exists, through communication on consumer-centric websites like this one. Social change from the bottom up, as opposed to censorship from the top down, is our only option. This is the higher purpose, so to speak, of the reviewer, and it is important - important enough that yes, it comes before courtesy in some cases. Being rude gets attention and it gets the message out there.
And while I'm glad you didn't feel threatened by this post - really, more power to you - I feel you're ignoring the fact that there were plenty of people who did. At least one blogger temporarily shut down her blog. (She returned to blogging about a month later, but you can read her farewell pot here.) Maybe she's taken them down, but I browsed through quickly and she doesn't seem to have written any particularly negative reviews - and yet still felt uncomfortable continuing to blog in the aftermath of this post and the #YAMafia discussions it spawned.
Some day, you'll probably read a book that you hate with overwhelming fury. (Unless, of course, you're one of those people who sets things aside - nothing wrong with that, but not everyone is capable of not finishing things they've started.) At that point you will be faced with a choice: voice that fury in full passion so that others can be warned of the things you hated; temper it and make it 'professional', with the understanding that more people may have a negative reading experience as a result, or say nothing. What option you go for is up to you, but others will not make the same choice and you should try to be understanding of their reasons.
Okay, at this point I'm going to walk away because I think we're going in circles. If you're objecting to the language used in some reviews, that's a matter of personal taste and possibly one of generational difference. Are there places where certain language is out of place? Yes. Are there also places where it is justified and possibly even necessary? Absolutely. Or at least I believe so; you're welcome to disagree.About book blogs - my phrasing mistake; I meant to communicate that book bloggers have an audience which they must assume includes publishers and authors, and that Goodreads reviewers don't necessarily need to make the same assumption.
Maybe it seems this way if you only read a few reviews, but most of the people who are scathing in some cases are perfectly nice and wonderful in others. They're, you know, human. No one is walking around being a jerk to everyone, and being a jerk can have its place. (Even if it doesn't, it's still to be expected. Like I said, human. And they may not realize their behavior seems poor to others.)
There's nothing you can do about the way they feel except maybe try to show some sympathy and/or understanding, which I feel you haven't been doing.
I'm not going to get into the author/reader thing except to say that if you check most author profiles, you'll find that they generally rate books highly, write infrequent reviews, and rarely interact with other GR users in the same manner that the users who are not authors do.
Anyhow, this conversation has been interesting but I feel it's losing steam. We can agree to disagree in a civil manner, can we not? And then quietly call that the end of it.
This is why I'm not a fan of people who review a book and trash it for the sake of how they "feel" in regards to books. More so if they ever want to be in the publishing industry or write a book, they really should think twice about what they are putting out into the universe. I've seen some pretty hateful review. Some that have gone WAY over the top with slandering remarks, foul language, and phrases that need an N-17 rating because it's not redeemable for the public!
I've had moments where some books haven't been my favorites, but I don't put it down like it's garbage being pushed down a disposal. I make sure to point out nicely what I didn't feel connected to, but I also point out what I enjoyed as well. BUT I also make sure to highlight what could of been better for the characters, the plot, etc... sometimes if the author reads that review or an editor on GR or the blog itself, then maybe it'll make a difference.
As they say, "You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar", plus who wants to deal with a wet-blanket melodrama reviewer in the end? just saying :)
You know who really agrees with Be Nice reviews? People who write poor quality self-published books and don't pay for editing.
Melissa wrote: "Get over it, Lucy."Get over, what, exactly?
Please, enlighten us.
Lucy wrote: "You know who really agrees with Be Nice reviews? People who write poor quality self-published books and don't pay for editing."AHAHAHAHAHAHA! I completely agree with you, Lucy.
@ Lucy, why so angry? Not just you but so many of you on here. I think most of you should read this blog post by Pam of Bookalicios, because unless you yourself are literally foot in the door of the publishing world, you may not realize from both sides of how it truly is... http://bookalicio.us/2012/01/please-s...
also everyone that is going in crazy up roar is taking this post and making mole hills into mountains right now. Why are we all acting like children and not adults? Can't we all take the high road, shrug our shoulders and move on? Or do we have to dig our feet in, fight a fight that goes in circles and look petty because of one single blog post that I believe isn't that vitally import in life. I mean it won't cure cancer or stop child abuse nor will it have the answer to life's burning questions.
The only reason I'm posting a second time is because I see so much hate, so much lashing out, and pain in the posts that it's too cold, calculating, unhuman like. *sigh* We're book reader, lovers who are passionate about what we share in regards to what we read. Why does everyone have to sink so low and not take the high road?
Rhiannon wrote: "Lucy, why so angry? Not just you but so many of you on here..."Did I swear or give any indication that I was angry in my last post? Or are you're just projecting an image of what you think a person who reviews books negatively is? Most of my reviews are positive, but I don't enjoy being told how to review books that I've paid for, spent time with, and thought deeply about. I'm fine with you reviewing books whichever way you so please. You're the one who is attempting to censor other people and shame them by saying they're taking The Low Road. I like the honest road so I guess I'll be concerned about life the day I find myself walking next to you.
Get over it, Lucy.
When you stop campaigning for everyone to censor their reviews about poor quality books in order to preserve personal ego then and only then will I get over it. So, that's what? Two days before hell freezes over? Whatever, Melissa. Go make some more accounts to stalk me with. That should keep you busy for a bit.
Joel wrote: "They're called the trolls of goodreads. They live for this shit. Ignore them."I think you live for this shit, seeing as it's the only thing you talk about. And a circle of 7 accounts all calling the top reviewers "trolls" does not make them so. I can't fathom the level of delusion you're living in, I really can't.
And here come the alter egos. all online at the same time, all with the same opinion.
Divers wrote: "i think what she means is that you need to get over this huge boner you seem to have for melissa. you all just can't leave her alone, can you? quite frankly, you're so butchy, holy terror, i wouldn't be surprised if you had a dick."Here we go again. And I'm the troll. Good lord, such delusion.
Well, I'd better go make some popcorn, because it looks like this thing is gonna blow up AGAIN. Honestly, this debate has been raging for almost a year, including some pretty nasty stuff that kicked off 2012 in just about the worst way imaginable, and it is NEVER the negative reviewers who start fights, unless you're deluded enough to think voicing an opinion qualifies as such.
Lucy wrote: "And here come the alter egos. all online at the same time, all with the same opinion."I'm not surprised. Such ugliness, yet again. You have awesome "friends," Melissa.
We should try to bet which fake account comes on next. Genny? Mira? Ceirce. Just pick from Melissa's five star reviews. They'll all inevitably show up. One. At. A. Time. As she logs in and out of the accounts to create the illusion of an army. You're an internet cliché at this point.
Lucy wrote: "As she logs in and out of the accounts to create the illusion of an army. You're an internet cliché at this point."Well, this at least gives me a good place to send GR staff to investigate the IPs.
Joel wrote: "Rhiannon, a word of advice. Don't bother with these people. They're called the trolls of goodreads. They live for this shit. Ignore them. "I'm not the type to be wavered by belittling comments. For instance, I've read reviews on blogs, GR, Amazon, etc... books that I've wanted to read and did that sway me from getting the book? Nope. It takes a lot to change my mind from someone I don't know or has no clue in general.
I'm a free thinker, who believes in that what we put out in the universe comes back to haunt use three-fold down the road. And this is more true with the internet. If you go for a job these days, they background check everything. I mean recently on the tv show, "How I Met Your Mother", they did an episode just based on a characters background check on the internet when he went for a job interview. He had a very embarrassing video lets just say of him naked and drunk on campus during the day lol
Anyway on a different note, to start an argument one must actually reply back, so if someone replies they want to start one whether they wanted to or not. Also if people don't stop fighting, I'm gunna find a way to get out a metaphorical guitar, start a fire, and make us all sing some friggin' kumbaya because I came to this site about books, not about social media lol *phew!* I'm done!
Also, I'd appreciate it if people flagged Divers's post. I just checked and I do not have a penis, so, that would be slander right there, folks. And also unnecessarily hateful.
Oh, Melissa, the misogynist company you keep.
@Lucy, how would I know about your reviews, your profile is private. Also the fact that you took the ENTIRE post I made towards you, even though I started with an "@ Lucy", was geared towards everyone, including people who weren't angry to begin with. You are so defensive, but so is everyone else on here. My version of negative reviews involve snarky comments and satirical humor that hits below the belt with dropping f'bombs left and right, while making fun of the author. That in itself is selfish, immature, and ranting raving. I know were not professionals, nor getting paid, but we all have a conscious and should realize that if we were face to face with the author, would you say word for word a negative review to them that you consider writing? If you couldn't do that, then writing that negative review shouldn't be published or should be revised. If I can't be truthful to someones face, then I have no right to talk smack behind their back or on the internet; which is mostly childish really.
Also the publishing houses do check social networking pages of anyone who is going into the industry, more so they don't hire people if they those who book review on blogs that slam a book, the author, and everything else under the sun more so if it's the same publishing company the book was crucified under. That would be like putting down a friend or a family member, which a publishing company becomes: a family.
I'm not saying don't post negative reviews, I have and I'm highly against censorship (hence my two blog posts about SOPA/IPA/NPPA recently!), but there is a fine line between being honest and being down right rude because they don't like the book.
And I'm not even saying you have negative reviews, I can't really tell, but I've seen some and I'm blown away by the lack of awareness in how horrifying they are.... I once saw one that mocked endlessly and pointing fingers at the author. There was no reasons why they backed up to not liking the book, which I found pointless as a review. It's those kind of reviews that make me scratch my head and wonder, "why do they review books?"
Rhiannon, I don't really have the time or energy to walk you through this. Regardless of whether or not you can see my reviews you have made assumptions about me that are not true. The first of which being that I was/am angry. I'm not angry. I'm exasperated. I'll forgive you for your assumptions though because I can't help but make a few myself about people who use the term 'f-bomb.' Anyway, Stacia Kane and Hannah Moskowitz recently did some blog posts on this topic that you might find enlightening if you want to self-educate, if not you probably won't ever see my reviews because I've blocked you. I'm sorry, I just can't be bothered to walk another person through this again. Good luck.
@THT, thank you for the link. I've enjoyed some of the others ones you've posted as well :)@ Lucy, That's fine, go ahead block. I'm not phased, but "exasperated" also means anger... here are some other versions as well for "exasperated": incense, anger, annoy, irritate, madden, enrage, antagonize, provoke, irk, vex, get on someone's nerves, ruffle someone's feathers, rub the wrong, etc... so you were angry basically.
Also saying "self-educate", is kind of talking down to someone saying they don't know jack-shyt about anything in that area they were originally talking about. Kind of an assumption much?
I say f-bomb out of respect because unless this is a discussion about George Carlin's 7 Dirty Words You Can't Say, then I don't need to go full on out real about it, can ya dig? lol maybe not...
Whether or not you have the energy, if you don't you should have stopped a long time ago, the fact that you couldn't means you are on the defensive side and hate being wrong, which brings me full circle back to me saying you are angry.
Also as the other saying goes, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
Yes, because annoyed and angry at the exact same things. I'm glad you know how to use an online dictionary, but perhaps you need to read a little bit more so that it's not just a jumble of letters to you.
Oh, joy. Let's see, who're the trolls here? The top GR reviewers in the US who wish Melissa would quit calling out the sockpuppet army or those who're calling others "bitches" and telling them to get over their boners.
Authors have already had their say so on the matter, Melissa and Co. Real authors who don't waste their time belittling fans or future colleagues.
My version of negative reviews involve snarky comments and satirical humor that hits below the belt with dropping f'bombs left and right, while making fun of the author. That in itself is selfish, immature, and ranting raving.
Selfish? I purchased the book. My enjoyment, by definition, duh, is selfish. I owe nothing to the author, or you.
Immature? Whether or not it's immature is irrelevant. I think you and your posse are being immature, but that's neither here nor there.
Ranting? I have the right to rant about whatever I like. I could easily say that you're ranting right now and trying to incite an argument. In the end, it's all rather subjective.
I like satirical humor, don't mind snark, and don't care either which way if someone uses "fuck". It really isn't up to you to decide what counts as horrifying if no personal attacks are made on the author. But, you probably didn't hear about the Julie Halpern incident. If you know nothing about about the last year or so of this issue, I'd advise that you leave. It's best if you read up on it, or sit on your hands.
The bottom line is that snark/rant reviews are entertaining, and you know it.
@ Cory, actually I have heard about the "Julie Halpern" situation. I've seen the scene shot and the blog post that was originally wrote by the blogger about the book. Also if you should know, advise yourself to research about the IPA/SOPA Act that if passed the entire internet could be censored. So instead of getting up in arms over what I'm saying and everyone else is saying, you might want to be more concerned with that.So what if you purchased the book? You didn't have to but you did. Don't take out that frustration on the author's book. That I find just silly. It's not like the author held a gun to your head and demanded that you purchase the book. It's a book, not a baby or a pet. Just a book that you are reading for fun, right?
And to me, ranting? It's about going on and on and on.... till the person is blue in the face complaining till there is no end about what they don't like. That is ranting. I've found it to mostly be when people are fucking pissed off about something and not just bugged about it. That alone I leave for serious stuff not everyday surface crap that has no point past my computer screen out in the real world.
Also saying "posse", is so high school sounding. I graduated from high school over 5 years ago and left it behind. But when people use that it's like stepping back into that grade school "vibe" that I find immature.
And I know it's not up to me or the author about what you say, but my point is if you are an aspiring writer and you book blog, then it'll come to bit you in the ass by certain publishing companies. It's something to consider, that's all.
@ Lucy, you blocked me why do you care so much about replying? Also if you blocked me, shouldn't my posts not show up for you to reply to in the first place? Just saying.
Kira wrote: "The bottom line is that snark/rant reviews are entertaining, and you know it."haha as long as they don't turn the book into a pile of it's former self and don't tear down the author, I don't mind them. I actual welcome them. But I've seen some and it's like watching a deer get hit by a semi-trunk: there is no hope for it to live.
Rhiannon wrote: "And to me, ranting? It's about going on and on and on.... till the person is blue in the face complaining till there is no end about what they don't like. That is ranting."You do realize that you just described your own posts, right?
The Holy Terror wrote: "Rhiannon wrote: "And to me, ranting? It's about going on and on and on.... till the person is blue in the face complaining till there is no end about what they don't like. That is ranting."You do..."
I don't care if I'm guilty as charged, I can admit that, it's something adults do, they accept. But I'm not angry, nor upset, I'm just constantly baffled at the way so many are talking to one another from the very beginning of this thread on page one let alone take swipes at the author. She has a job, she published a book, yada yada yada. The point is that it's just going in circles at this point almost turning into a crop circle of conspiracies from the look of things in the way everyone is taking sides or such.
Anyway, I've got more important things to do like eat a well nourishing meal called dinner to masticate and fill my stomach. Ahh brain food :)
Oh, lord. Someone telling me to look up SOPA while they don't understand why I mentioned Halpern in my post. Posse was intentional. Generally, people who call others bitches with no provocation and say that others have boners are those who have a high school mentality. That was directed at Melissa and her friends. Obviously, you didn't get it.
Please, take your hypocritical behavior with you. I'm unable to understand if you're trying to be intentionally humorous, or if you're truly clueless. I'm truly baffled at why writing you think writing a snarky review is taking swipes at an author. A book is not the author's baby. The author is not their book. By continuing to post and tell us how wrong we are, you are perpetrating the very behavior you claim to dislike.
I have no time for anyone who judges me (or choose not to blurb me, read my book, represent me, whatever) because I hated a book they wrote, represent, or edited and expressed my opinion on the matter in a way they deemed inappropriate. Their loss. The end. Anyone who's that petty needs a reality check.
Cory wrote: "Generally, people who call others bitches with no provocation and say that others have boners are those who have a high school mentality."You forgot that I also have a dick and I'm butchy-looking.
Almost better than the time they called me a motherfucking fat ugly cunt.
Almost.
@ Cory, listen you can say all you want, but you are just a teenager with a chip on the shoulder. Till you get out of high school you won't understand how the real world works and why I'm saying what I'm saying. Also don't mock SOPA, seriously. If it gets passed by the court, the internet is at risk, even independent publishing and more. You really should care...
^^^ Dulé Hill is funny as hell on "Psych", loving that gif :D
Divers wrote: "Lucy wrote: "Rhiannon, I don't really have the time or energy to walk you through this. Regardless of whether or not you can see my reviews you have made assumptions about me that are not true. The..."How fucking rude are you? Tell me, Divers, have you ever convinced someone to agree with you by calling them stupid? Does that work? I bet not. Please, if you must argue, at least try to be polite. Your behavior is an insult to everyone who agrees with you and everyone you try to defend.
Divers wrote: "i'll add another one, holy terror. you're also a fucking liar. i saw that you went around telling everyone that *you* removed your review of melissa's book because you said something like you didn't want to see it on your account. bullshit. melissa showed me the email she got from the goodreads moderator that listed the slanderous reviews removed from her book. yours was the first on the list. so go ahead and tell everyone you did it. we know you're full of shit."Lol, if you're talking about the first review where I linked to a screen-shot of her own words, yeah, GR took that one down. I wouldn't lie about that. Apparently linking to the author's own petty comments is frowned upon. But slander? No, that's not slander at all.
You do realize you're not doing her any favors, right? If I was an author I wouldn't want to be associated with you at all.
Also, how are you seeing my comments? Someone has a spy, it seems.
Rhiannon wrote: "@ Cory, listen you can say all you want, but you are just a teenager with a chip on the shoulder. Till you get out of high school you won't understand how the real world works and why I'm saying wh..."Oh, lord, someone else making assumptions about me. Now look, I could make quite a few assumptions about you based on your taste in books or your major or the company you keep on this site. But I'll keep it simple -- I'm not in high school. I never went to high school. I'm in college.
As you're what, 24, I don't think you're in a position to lecture someone on how much they know about the world.
And, as for SOPA, I think I know more about the bill than you do. So, please, keep your condescension to yourself and learn a little something about reading comprehension. You've failed to understand the point in every single one of my points and you've decided to resort to ageism. Not cool.
Divers wrote: "how am i seeing your comments? i am in melissa's writing group. we meet once a week. there are about twenty of us and we can *all* see your comments."Only if one of you is someone I haven't blocked, which would mean you have some sad sap spying for you. You have to be smart enough to tell I've blocked you.
You're in the same writing group with Melissa? That .. makes so much sense.
Divers wrote: "it's not my aim to get you to agree with me because i know the attempt would be futile. and if you want me to be polite, why don't you tell your fucking rude friends to be more polite, hypocrite?"Nobody is being rude but you. I'm even being civil with you, even though I have no reason to be.
Yes, the quality of their writing is so similar they could be the same person, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again... Only one with an author profile but they're all in a writing group and all twenty of them leap to defend her, like red shirts or dun dun dun sockpuppets. Writing groups don't general consist of more than a handful of people, but I guess imaginary people count.
@Divers: I believe you were the same person on my review of that Cassandra Clare short, so it's no surprise to see you continuing the same sad and pathetic behavior you displayed there at another location although different time. (Actually, I am sure of it because, remember, I blocked you? Not that I'm trying to drag old arguments onto this thread. I'm just saying.)Why is it considered the epitome of rude to be "mean" towards a book, but calling real people (yes, even though you can't see them, people you converse with on the internet are indeed real) bitches is perfectly fine? What exactly are you trying to say here? If you're saying that you shouldn't be rude to a book to save an author's feelings, turning right around and insulting people is indeed being a hypocrite, because your entire argument does actually hinge itself on that one should be considerate of other peoples feelings. It just doesn't make any sense to me.
Not of course that anyone here actually cares what you think of them. Just something to consider.
Rhiannon wrote: "@ Cory, listen you can say all you want, but you are just a teenager with a chip on the shoulder. Till you get out of high school you won't understand how the real world works and why I'm saying what I'm saying."Cory clearly doesn't need my help, but I would like to point out that I am more than six years out of high school, and two out of college, so does that mean my opinion is worth more than yours? Because I've always found Cory's reviews and comments perceptive and forthright, and always thought-provoking. This dismissal just because you happen to have been born a few years earlier frankly angers me.
And I'm honestly confused: how did SOPA come into it? I don't see how that in any way intersects with this discussion.
Divers doesn't deserve a response.
@Melissa: Bye.
Of course, Mel is the dominant personality in the many faces of eve
Melissa wrote: "HT, what he means is that of course there are people in our group you haven't blocked."I block everyone who is friends with you or who likes your books. So if they're on here and they're your friends they shouldn't be able to see anything of mine. Unless of course you make secondary accounts. I can't block every new member account you make.
Divers wrote: "it's not my aim to get you to agree with me because i know the attempt would be futile. and if you want me to be polite, why don't you tell your fucking rude friends to be more polite, hypocrite? "I don't lecture my friends because they are defending themselves, and as far as I'm concerned that means they get to be a lot ruder since they have already been insulted. If they were tossing around homophobic or otherwise particularly offensive slurs (which by the way, you have) I'd call them out, but they limit themselves to common curse words and questioning your integrity - which in my book is fine, given that you're attacking them like a rabid dog.
Melissa, if you want this discussion to be over, I'd strongly suggest you stop responding every time this blog post gets a new post. To be honest I forget I even have notifications on for this thing until someone comments, and every time since your first post here it's a different user commenting and then you right after. Usually not adding anything to the discussion, just a fragmentary agreement if they're in accord with Fitzpatrick. Which is, you know, a little bit annoying.
To be perfectly honest, I think Fitzpatrick would do everyone a favor if she deleted this post. After a year it's clear that no one is going to change their minds on the subject and certainly no one is learning from the discussion in the comments; all it does is occasionally stir up shitfests like this and make people angry. There are ways to further discussion, but commenting on something so divisive as this post is not one of them.
If the publishing business is all about PR and courtesy than I'm sure that author would have been happy to have a well known author write good things about her book, and if she had the maturity level of at least a seventeen year old than she would have appreciated hearing what was wrong with it. Your excuses for not reading this manuscript are a mask to cover how petty and immature you apparently are. As quite a few people have stated, you would be wise to get rid of this before you piss off more people.
Goodreads is a place full of book lovers eager to find a good book they like or review books they have read. The only way the former finds good books is because of the latter. So bad reviews are important parts to the community here and bad reviews are reminders that we are not perfect. Also the only way authors learn is from their bad reviews, and in fact whenever I write anything I welcome bad reviews so I can fix my story and make it better. As a wise person once said "No one should fall in love with their first draft, not even their second or third should be their best." And why do we rewrite things? Because we get bad reviews. If a person is going to pay $22.00 or $17.00 or whatever off their money they can be as harsh as they like. What matters is writing and not someone's opinion and personality when it comes to publishing. Or at least that is what should matter.
Sorry for other people reading this if I've gotten a little long-winded with this, I just got really mad.
p.s if their are any mistakes or anything someone wants to add about something that's wrong grammatically or they disagree or a missed point than go ahead, I would welcome the criticism.