I have many thoughts, but it took me a couple of days to write this, and then I didn't want to bury it under the Golden Globes liveblog, so
( Read more... )
I just read this on my phone while stuck on the train so I can't commennt in any sort of eloquent way, so I will just quickly say that 1) you are awesome and 2) it's been interesting to see how this has played out in the TV world as well (Aaron Sorkin and Dan Harmon have convinced me that all show-runners should spend a week on ONTD in irder to calm down).
The weirdest thing for me is that Sorkin seemed to show some humor and self-awareness (with the "lemonlyman.com" plot) and then, I dunno, just completely forgot it later. Was that actually some other writer on that episode?
But even the lemonlyman thing is ~hotly debated~ because some people think that it was a reaction to Sorkin's displeasure at the Television Without Pity forums. But if that was him poking fun at himself, he definitely lost it with all his "Nobodies on the internet are ruining Studio 60 with their criticism!"
OH SWEET JESUS DAN HARMON. I feel guilty about being completely in love with Community because it means that that asshole gets some of my money sometimes.
Thank you for this post. Please fax a copy to every published writer in the known universe.
I know it's got to be hard to see people write bad things about something you spent years and tears slaving over, but not everyone is going to like your book. It's just how it is. Authors and agents really need to look at the people who have attacked (directly or not) a bad review or reviewer who didn't give them 100 stars, and learn from their example. It will never help you. You will always look bad.
The worst part is so many of the reviews I'm seeing attacked on GoodReads aren't that bad. The readers are actually sad they didn't like the book and regretful and not even snarky. I just.. I don't get it. I mean, I get the impulse to defend your work, but seriously, BACK AWAY FROM THE KEYBOARD.
I think it's the LORD COCKMONSTER thing -- it's not so much what they said, but that it disagrees with THE TRUTH THAT THE AUTHOR INTENDED THE READER TO EXTRACT. (Ack, on iPad and forgot to turn off caps lock but I am not going to retype that.) The reviewer has drawn a WRONG conclusion on the Internet.
I think it's a matter of how easily you can dismiss the reviewer, in your own mind, as "obviously has no idea what they're talking about." Like, if someone completely detests my work and thinks I'm an asshole for writing it, I can just go "Pfft, well of course one can't expect total philistines to understand one's artistry" or "Well, that person is just a crank who hates everything"; if they give me a mixed review, or one that makes it obvious that they did understand my artistry, they just didn't like it... not so much.
I kind of want to send this to everyone who read/reviews/writes fanfiction, too. I mean obviously it isn't SRS BZNS since we're not exactly getting paid for this anyway, BUT I DID NOT CLICK ON YOUR STORY TO LISTEN TO YOU BITCH HALFWAY THROUGH ABOUT HOW MEAN THE REVIEWS (THAT I DIDN'T READ AND DON'T CARE ABOUT) ARE AND HOW WRONG EVERYBODY IS. STIFLE YOURSELF.
I have had to do this before. I've written three NaNos, and so I've got roughly 200,000 words of mostly crap. There might be something redeemable in them somewhere, eventually, one of these days, BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT. The point is that I wrote them. They're on paper. They don't have to be good. Good comes later. What's that quote? Everbody has a million terrible words waiting to be written, so you might as well get them all out now?
Just a tangential note: I'm fascinated to hear about the quote at the end. Because I've run into it before (and used it many times since) in a completely different context
( ... )
Man, I have no idea what the origins are. I think the principle is the same- EVERYBODY'S first draft sucks. EVERBODY'S first story is shit. You have to practice at writing, just like sketching. That's why NaNo is actually helpful (or was for me) because it gets you over the fact that you're writing stuff that is bad. You know it's bad, but you have to write it ANYWAY because otherwise you're NEVER going to write anything. You can take a bad novel and make it good. You can't do anything with nothing.
I've written three NaNos, and so I've got roughly 200,000 words of mostly crap.
I am so there with you! I've also written three NaNos, as well as two Script Frenzies, and... oh the utter crap ton of extra words that I didn't need (for the story, not to win NaNo) and do not want... and are utter, blithering CRAP. I do not relish the thought of going through the last two (the first one was alright) and throwing out all the crap that has been crammed into them... :P
One of the NaNo quotes that I live by, is: "It doesn't have to be good. It doesn't even have to make sense! It just has to be fifty thousand words..." :)
This is one of my biggest fears when writing for Smart Bitches- I'm a little bit known for ripping the HELL out of really old romances (the tag "I read this shit so you don't have to" was invented for me, and the advantage of doing it to the old books is the authors just don't care about them any more. I've had many authors come into the comments of books I loved (and I'm not shy about squeeing all over the review when I love things), and so far only one has come in when I was mostly unhappy with the book. My biggest concerns with that one was it was 10 pounds of plot in a 5 pound skin (with unexpected zombies), and Jane Toombs was like, "yeah... I did cram a lot in there, didn't I? My agent loved it, because it would sell, and I've learned a lot since then."
Class act!
Mostly, though, the community vibe of SMart Bitches is SO MUCH DIFFERENT than wading into the fray at GoodReads. It's been insane!
Honestly, the internet is so small these days that I am just really not going to snark at depth unless it's so old that the writer is probably not around anymore. I probably could have recapped The Hunger Games if I'd wanted to, because you can have fun even with really good books, and Suzanne Collins seems chill, but... why even go there nowadays? But I still have to worry about it with the occasional Movies in Fifteen Minutes I do, because people have told me that they know, for a fact, that this or that actor has read them and/or will read the next one. Even good feedback can have the proverbial Chilling Effect. So I try to be fair, or point out good things along with bad, or try to have fun with story conventions rather than get personal, but... yeah. It gives you a pretty good idea of what you shouldn't do as a writer, because it made you uncomfortable as a reviewer
( ... )
I believe that was Dan Krokos. He was whining on Twitter so I looked him up and he has really good ratings on his books so... what?
And yeah, the internet has become a tiny world. I never link reviews from my blog to authors but they find them and retweet them and leave comments. So far no author has responded to my negative reviews. I try to even out the snark/frustration with pointing out the good but I'm always scared an author will freak out on me. Still, I feel like it's important to be honest, and sometimes a book with tons of potential is just bad [in my opnion anyhow... and often times lots of people disagree, which is fine].
Would have liked to see your recaps of The Hunger Games, though. Those books are great but there is plenty of SNARK POTENTIAL.
I did write an in-depth discussion of THG with some live-tweet-type bits off Twitter, but not a Twilight-length recap, no.
I think a lot of people unthinkingly or even passive-aggressively say things like, "Here's my (totally negative) review of @author's book," thinking maybe @author doesn't check their mentions very closely, and hey, the reviewer's followers can see that @author is, in fact, on Twitter and check them out. Yeah... no. Writers watch that kind of thing. And whether the @mention was intentional or not, the writers then see it as baiting them.
And this is assuming that they don't just straight-up search for their names or book titles in plain text, which they can also do. You just really have to accept certain risks and prepare for certain eventualities if you do this kind of thing.
Comments 97
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I know it's got to be hard to see people write bad things about something you spent years and tears slaving over, but not everyone is going to like your book. It's just how it is. Authors and agents really need to look at the people who have attacked (directly or not) a bad review or reviewer who didn't give them 100 stars, and learn from their example. It will never help you. You will always look bad.
The worst part is so many of the reviews I'm seeing attacked on GoodReads aren't that bad. The readers are actually sad they didn't like the book and regretful and not even snarky. I just.. I don't get it. I mean, I get the impulse to defend your work, but seriously, BACK AWAY FROM THE KEYBOARD.
Reply
I KNOOOOOOOOOOOOW. It's amazing to me that the hissyfits were over mixed/middling reviews and not, like, the F+ I linked.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I have had to do this before. I've written three NaNos, and so I've got roughly 200,000 words of mostly crap. There might be something redeemable in them somewhere, eventually, one of these days, BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT. The point is that I wrote them. They're on paper. They don't have to be good. Good comes later. What's that quote? Everbody has a million terrible words waiting to be written, so you might as well get them all out now?
Reply
Reply
Reply
I am so there with you! I've also written three NaNos, as well as two Script Frenzies, and... oh the utter crap ton of extra words that I didn't need (for the story, not to win NaNo) and do not want... and are utter, blithering CRAP. I do not relish the thought of going through the last two (the first one was alright) and throwing out all the crap that has been crammed into them... :P
One of the NaNo quotes that I live by, is: "It doesn't have to be good. It doesn't even have to make sense! It just has to be fifty thousand words..." :)
Reply
Reply
Class act!
Mostly, though, the community vibe of SMart Bitches is SO MUCH DIFFERENT than wading into the fray at GoodReads. It's been insane!
Reply
Reply
And yeah, the internet has become a tiny world. I never link reviews from my blog to authors but they find them and retweet them and leave comments. So far no author has responded to my negative reviews. I try to even out the snark/frustration with pointing out the good but I'm always scared an author will freak out on me. Still, I feel like it's important to be honest, and sometimes a book with tons of potential is just bad [in my opnion anyhow... and often times lots of people disagree, which is fine].
Would have liked to see your recaps of The Hunger Games, though. Those books are great but there is plenty of SNARK POTENTIAL.
Reply
I think a lot of people unthinkingly or even passive-aggressively say things like, "Here's my (totally negative) review of @author's book," thinking maybe @author doesn't check their mentions very closely, and hey, the reviewer's followers can see that @author is, in fact, on Twitter and check them out. Yeah... no. Writers watch that kind of thing. And whether the @mention was intentional or not, the writers then see it as baiting them.
And this is assuming that they don't just straight-up search for their names or book titles in plain text, which they can also do. You just really have to accept certain risks and prepare for certain eventualities if you do this kind of thing.
Reply
Leave a comment