Legitimacy--question to readers.

[sartorias]

When I was thirteen, I used to carry a pen around wherever I went so that people would see it and know I was a writer. I'm sure now if anyone even bothered to notice my myopic, zit-faced self, the pen just looked stupid, especially as it marked up most of my clothes. But I thought people would see past the dorky clothes, the scrawny, awkward

Comments

[frumiousb]

It's certainly made the feedback feel more direct. I've been writing capsules about the books that I read for some time now-- in journals, at Amazon, and now in my own journal. I've noticed in the last few years with so many writers blogging that I have started to get responses from the writers themselves, or friends of the writers. Interestingly (at least to me) there are now a few writers who I cannot read without having their online presence in mind.

It's often interesting and occasionally has led to some lively conversations. But it has also lately taken on a pecking order flavor all its own-- kind of a tone against non-writer reviewers. Occasionally it takes on a feeling that only professional reviewers and other writers are qualified to discuss someone's work. I don't like that very much.

[sartorias]

Eugh, no. But the proliferation of book reviews and discussions was a big part of wanting to participate in the interwebs.

[coalescent]

But it has also lately taken on a pecking order flavor all its own-- kind of a tone against non-writer reviewers. Occasionally it takes on a feeling that only professional reviewers and other writers are qualified to discuss someone's work.

I haven't felt that myself, but I do think the extent to which writers make up the sf blogosphere -- in comparison to, say, the broader litblogosphere -- ends up distorting the nature of the discussion that happens quite a bit.

[sartorias]

How? Too much networking/backslapping/touting of one another's stuff in friendship circles? I see a lot of the latter, but then have to think, well, the reason they became friends was because they loved one another's stuff so much, so the legitimacy of their enthusiasm can't be disallowed.

[catwithclaws]

do you find blogs change your mind about writers?

Blogs might affect how I think about or view them as a PERSON, but not about them as an AUTHOR. I can admire their writting style in any form (blog, novel, etc). But I only make judgements as a person as an AUTHOR if I've read something they've written and published.

Does having access to writers (which is a relatively new thing) make a difference in how you partake of their offerings?

Not really. I have 6 or so published 'known' writers that I read blogs for, you included. In some cases, I had read their works before finding their blogs (such as yours, I'd stumbled across the Wren books first), in others I knew their blog and online persona well before I ever read anything they had written (dancinghorse for example I 'met' through your and another LJ friend's posts about her). In her case I actually was *hesitant* to read her works since I didn't want to end up disappointed after everything I like about her, her horses, her riding philosophy and the other ways we've connected as online

[sartorias]

It would be an awesome paper topic. Here;s my question, is there a sense of trusting author recommended authors and works more than other readers, or do you find you trust recommendations (whether from readers or authors) that go into more detail about why they liked the reading experience?

One of the things I'm thinking about with this question is the conflict between critical anaylsis (which, among other things, assumes you've read the book) and reviews, which assume you have not read the book, but which are there to provide clues to whether or not you'd like to try the work in question.

[catwithclaws]

To bad I decided to not pursue a masters in English Lit. I'll have to remember this if I ever go insane and decide I want to go back to college

[sartorias]

Makes sense to me! (Maybe it hels that it's a bazillion degrees today, and I slept about four hours.)

No, it does make sense. And yes about critical analysis. I enjoy some of it, but I really have to know the book well.

[dichroic]

Just for starters, there are a number of writers (including one Sherwood Smith :-) whose books I picked up *because* I enjoyed what I was reading in their blogs.

Next, lots of writers talk about writing. I find that what I'm learning has begun affecting my reading. I'm a lot more impatient with the telling vs showing thing. (And somewhat bemused to find an irritating about of it in some Literary Writers. *Why* are those guys considered so good again?) For instance, I'm currently in an online discussion of Pride & Prejudice my university is running for alumni and I'm really startled to find how much of what I'm picking up there is traceable directly back to reading LJ.

Third, I've been to two cons, ever: one was Worldcon in LA, the other was a tiny local one. So I never had that connection to the writers I read that SF fen who go to cons do, and blogs are a more than adequate substitute.

But the second point is the most important. Boy howdy, have I learned a lot.

[sartorias]

Oh, that's awesome about the learning. So have I! It keeps astounding me how much I've learned in the past ten years that I simply hadn't access to before.

I envy you that P&P discussion! I never tire of Austentalk.

[dichroic]

Yeah, it's a really nice thing; they have a professor to run it, bring up interesting points and contrast and provide background. I very much enjoyed my English classes in college, but as an engineer I only got to take two so this is some recompense.

Also, this is a program from their Writers' House (not a department but a resource / gathering center) which was established several years after I graduated so it's nice to get the benefit of it this way.

[asakiyume]

As you know, I'm a reader as well as a writer, and I can say, resoundingly, yes, my discovery of the blogosphere has totally changed how and who I read. Now I read lots of unpublished work; before, I never did. Now, I patronize small magazines; before, I barely knew they existed; now, I've been made aware of recent writers in the genres I loved as a younger person but that I hadn't read much in, in recent years--mainly because I hadn't read much, period.

Not only is there you, whom I knew as a blogger before I knew as a writer, but there are bunches of other people whose blogs turned me on to their other writing: nineweaving, watermelontail, sovay, las--well, basically about two-thirds of my friends list. Most recently, haikujaguar, whom I read for months as a commenter on your blog before a post by fpb prompted me to start reading her blog--and wow, what an interesting person with an interesting approach to her career

[sartorias]

I tried once to count up how many authors I'd discovered through blogs, but I have no head for numbers. It's a lot, though!

[gategrrl]

All I can say is - it depends

[sartorias]

Yes, that answers it perfectly. "That depends" makes sense to me as I've had similar experiences. Including about the Fangs Fur Fey folk.

[kalimac]

FWIW I don't care for Heinlein-style stuff either, so I haven't read Scalzi's work in that style; but I did read and enjoy Agent to the Stars, a lighter work that's rather in the spirit of his blogging.