Trish, at “Hey, Lady! Whatcha Reading!” recently posted a link to a blog entry where the author talked about an author who asked that she remove a quote and the cover art because she didn't have permission to use them. While I’m no legal expert, I’m pretty sure it’s alright for a reviewer to briefly quote an author’s work. Sadly, this doesn’t shock me at all, as I’ve seen a veritable epidemic of authors acting out in the past year or so. And yes, I rubberneck at these egregious examples of how NOT to take criticism.
Ted Bell, a NYT bestselling suspense author, recently attacked a few reviewers on Amazon.com who didn’t just LOVE his latest novel, using the username of his stepson (then the author outed himself by posting under his own name, saying, "as I was just saying earlier?"). He apologized, people thought sincerely, but pretty soon he went back at it. For a long time, it was suspected that Andrew Davidson, author of The Gargoyle, did something similar.
Last spring, I published a three-star review of a memoir that I thought was, well, average. Immediately, I got comments from relatives of the author, who told me that, since the book had been reviewed in the NYTRB, my opinion was therefore invalid. Another went on to attack my “moniker” on Amazon.com (my first initial and last name; frankly, I've heard so many "huff and puff" jokes that they cease to phase me).
Last summer Leslie Carroll attacked a few reviewers on Amazon.com as well; read the account of it here.
Deborah MacGillivray (did I spell that right?), romance author, actually threatened to sic a private investigator on someone who posted a less-than-stellar review of one of her books on Amazon.
And other authors who have been guilty of similar infractions include: Laurie Notaro, Linda Berdoll, and Anne Rice. I understand, in a way, what motivates authors to be so sensitive to criticism. After all, they spend countless hours researching, outlining, writing, re-writing, and editing, and they wouldn’t write if they didn’t love what they do. But I can’t for the life of me imagine why any author would waste their valuable time attacking just one reader, or a handful of readers, who didn’t like something they’d published. Bloggers and reviewers on sites like Amazon.com have quickly become the new wave of book reviewing, and we’re becoming more and more respected and trusted by publishers for our honest opinions. It seems that an author's time would be better spent working to improve their next book instead of engaging in petty, puerile battles with people they've never met. What do you think?
Ted Bell, a NYT bestselling suspense author, recently attacked a few reviewers on Amazon.com who didn’t just LOVE his latest novel, using the username of his stepson (then the author outed himself by posting under his own name, saying, "as I was just saying earlier?"). He apologized, people thought sincerely, but pretty soon he went back at it. For a long time, it was suspected that Andrew Davidson, author of The Gargoyle, did something similar.
Last spring, I published a three-star review of a memoir that I thought was, well, average. Immediately, I got comments from relatives of the author, who told me that, since the book had been reviewed in the NYTRB, my opinion was therefore invalid. Another went on to attack my “moniker” on Amazon.com (my first initial and last name; frankly, I've heard so many "huff and puff" jokes that they cease to phase me).
Last summer Leslie Carroll attacked a few reviewers on Amazon.com as well; read the account of it here.
Deborah MacGillivray (did I spell that right?), romance author, actually threatened to sic a private investigator on someone who posted a less-than-stellar review of one of her books on Amazon.
And other authors who have been guilty of similar infractions include: Laurie Notaro, Linda Berdoll, and Anne Rice. I understand, in a way, what motivates authors to be so sensitive to criticism. After all, they spend countless hours researching, outlining, writing, re-writing, and editing, and they wouldn’t write if they didn’t love what they do. But I can’t for the life of me imagine why any author would waste their valuable time attacking just one reader, or a handful of readers, who didn’t like something they’d published. Bloggers and reviewers on sites like Amazon.com have quickly become the new wave of book reviewing, and we’re becoming more and more respected and trusted by publishers for our honest opinions. It seems that an author's time would be better spent working to improve their next book instead of engaging in petty, puerile battles with people they've never met. What do you think?
Comments
Thanks for posting this blog entry, as it is interesting reading. Thanks also to those readers (Jen and Amanda) who have already commented.
I'm Andrew Davidson, who wrote The Gargoyle, which is referenced in this article. I keep Google alerts on my name and the book, and this is how I came to this post. I am interested in what people have to say about the book, both positive and negative. I believe it is good to know such things, and I appreciate the efforts of anyone who takes the time to post his or her thoughts.
Another reason I keep track of such things is that I have had some experience with people pretending to be me online. Specifically, the event that you talk about when I was "suspected" of trashing negative reviews of my book. This is something that I have never done: opinions are opinions and stand as such, and I would never attack anyone for theirs.
For anyone who would like to read further about the (incorrect) suspicion that I was somehow involved in a flame war about The Gargoyle, here are two relevant links in which I addressed the issue. I responded as quickly and thoroughly as I could at the time it was happening, because I truly believe that nothing is more valuable than a person's good reputation.
http://litlicense.blogspot.com/2008/08/gargoyle-generates-some-interesting.html
http://www.amazon.com/review/R13F1UGE5OEGOZ/ref=cm_cr_pr_cmt?%5Fencoding=UTF8&ASIN=0385524943&nodeID=#wasThisHelpful
All the best,
Andrew Davidson
Writer of The Gargoyle
andrew@thegargoyle.com
P.S. Many of the original posts by the person pretending to be me have been removed from the Amazon chat room, so I realize it might be somewhat difficult to follow.
Besides, I normally only pay attention to book reviews when they're from a trusted source (like this site!)
Aunt j-ha comes up with a good point, too; so much interation online can be done anonymously, and it leads people to say things that they wouldn't normally.
We should be honest, but there's no need to be cruel.
Well put Katherine!
I have no problem if an author leaves a comment addressing a concern or question I mentioned in my review. Sometimes finding out why an author chose to write what he/she did is helpful.
For instance, I attended a book event here in Vancouver and Andrew Davidson was one of the authors. My review was very positive, but I was annoyed that he used the main character's first and last name almost all the time. At the event, I asked him why and it really cleared it up for me. If he would have chose to address this on my blog as a comment, I would have welcomed it.
I do have a problem with attacks. Luckly I only have had one mild one so far.
I like to think I understand the emotions authors are dealing with, but it's also a piece of art you're putting out there. I mean, who hasn't read a bad review before and why in the world would you ever think your work would be exempt from it?