Janitor On Duty

journal photo

March 25th, 2007

12:38 PM

Bizarre Author Quirk


So, is there some sort of club that is formed while I'm not looking? For authors who send me books to review and then announce publicly that they have no idea how their books got reviewed by me when those reviews end up being less than glowing?

Not that I am angry or anything, I'm just puzzled by this kind of behavior. What does it prove? If the author keeps quiet about the fact that she sent me books, nobody will know, right? So why make public OH NO HOW DOES SHE GET HER HANDS ON MY BOOKS?!! announcements? What good does it do? Do they get some kind of medal? Membership to some exclusive "That bitch hates me!" club? Guilty conscience at work? No, really, what's the point?
 
Another one for my files of Really Strange Author Behaviors, I suppose, right up there with authors who insist that I hate them because I gave them a review with an 80+ score and authors who make public announcements to their peers apologizing for any good reviews from me for their works apparently because they are too ashamed to be reviewed favorably. Fine, but these authors send me books in the first place to be reviewed so why then the whole "I'm sorry, I didn't like it when the bitch loves my works!" attitude? I can't help feeling used here, really, as if I'm being used to garner attention to their ebooks yet I'm being treated like chewing gum stuck at the sole of their shoes for the crime of liking their ebooks. Lucky me, I'm nice not to name names here but these authors have better not send me their books next time or they will really make themselves bigger hypocrites than they already are.

May I take this opportunity to remind these authors again: please, please, do not send me anything if you cannot take the things I will say. I don't mind tearing apart ebooks, but if YOU will find that a problem, then please do yourself a favor and don't send me these ebooks. I don't need anyone sending me ebooks, I can buy them myself, so it's not like you have to send me anything, especially when you not sending them to me may give you a better peace of mind.

Sometimes, I tell you, dealing with immature and even outright crazy e-authors takes too much time and effort (the effort of sitting on my hands before I type something that will embarrass them, that is). My only worry is that it may actually affect my enjoyment of those ebooks in general in the long run because a part of me always wonders what crazy reaction will a particular review garner.

PS:

I love the blog/website Dear Author to pieces but I need to know - is it just me who find the site always loading so slowly for me? I have this problem since the last few months. I'm in Malaysia, which probably explains the slowness, but I do not have this problem with other websites. For example, websites on Blogger load almost instantaneously for me. Dear Author, however, takes a good 30 seconds to even a few minutes to load for me each time.

PS 2:

The funniest thing I've read the other day is this theory that I don't really live in Malaysia and that I somehow uses some kind of "router" to give the impression that I am. Seriously now, even if I will go through that much effort for who knows what reason, I'm not that capable. I can't even master properly the whole PHP thing, much less set up a routing system.

49 comment(s).

Posted by Tilly Greene:

Seriously, someone thinks you're doctoring your router? Oh dear, they're reaching aren't they :-)

Hmmm, think the Dear Author issue might be you. It isn't lickity split, but quick enough to not notice anything...sorry.
March 25th, 2007 @ 10:04 PM

Posted by Ann Wesley Hardin:

I'm being treated like chewing gum stuck at the sole of their shoes for the crime of liking their ebooks

Just in case I contributed unwittingly to this icky feeling, I wanted to explain that my author friends and I have an inside joke about "passing the bucket", or feeling nauseated when anything really spectacular happens to us. When we were unpublished, we used to say this to each other when we'd get requests from editors and all. So my reference on my blog to "bowing humbly before the porcelain god" was a message to my friends that your review was such an exciting, wonderful thing, I got sick from it. LOL. I know it sounds dumb when I explain it, but it was IN NO WAY intended as an insult to you or your review of OOTW. However, I realize it can be taken that way. I hope it wasn't. Because of all the reivews I've ever gotten, I value yours the most. You're highly respected amongst my group!
March 25th, 2007 @ 10:15 PM

Posted by Mrs G:

Nope, it's not you, Ms Hardin, really. I'd like to believe that I know tongue-in-cheek posts when I see them.
March 25th, 2007 @ 10:21 PM

Posted by Ann Wesley Hardin:

Oh good. Phew! I can now carry on with my day, secure in the knowledge that I haven't affronted anyone...yet. It's still early :-(
March 25th, 2007 @ 10:35 PM

Posted by Mrs G:

That's the problem with not naming names, heh. Everyone starts to think I'm talking about them when most likely I'm not!
March 25th, 2007 @ 10:40 PM

Posted by Ann Wesley Hardin:

That's because we're such insecure little weasels. Speaking only for myself, of course. I do hope to one day overcome the guilt for being born. I'm getting there, but it's a struggle.

Anyway, should be fun to watch the paranoia hit the fan. I'm scrubbing mine off the walls as I speak...
March 25th, 2007 @ 10:59 PM

Posted by Barbara Sheridan:

Chalk up the weird author behavior up to that "fine line between creativity and madness".
March 25th, 2007 @ 11:53 PM

Posted by Karen Scott:

I have the same problem with the Dear Author website. It takes the longest to upload of any of the blogs I visit. I just thought it was me. :)
March 26th, 2007 @ 12:09 AM

Posted by AV:

ehrm...i'm afraid to vote. Never know these days how anything's going to be interpreted, even by the most reasonable of people. Plus, I'd like another vote option ... delete the good reviews (anything 70+) and leave the not-so-good reviews up.
March 26th, 2007 @ 12:50 AM

Posted by Maria Duncan:

'PS 2:

The funniest thing I've read the other day is this theory that I don't really live in Malaysia and that I somehow uses some kind of "router" to give the impression that I am. Seriously now, even if I will go through that much effort for who knows what reason, I'm not that capable. I can't even master properly the whole PHP thing, much less set up a routing system.'

It's amazing how paranoid people can be
March 26th, 2007 @ 1:06 AM

Posted by Emily Veinglory:

I think the poll is causing a bevy of pop-ups? IMHO it's a good idea to rise above things--just as authors should with reviews.
March 26th, 2007 @ 2:31 AM

Posted by Nonny:

I don't get it either.

I think it should be obvious from reading your reviews that you don't guarantee in any way a "good" review.

It's easier to get e-published than print. I don't mean anything against e-pubbing here; there are several high-quality publishers out there. But there's also a lot that aren't. I've known a few writers to have their very first submissions accepted. As a result, they haven't had much of an opportunity to grow a thick skin towards rejection and negative opinion. They send out books for review expecting the reviewer to love it, and when she doesn't, they're hurt and angry.

Certainly, there are print-published and long-time authors who are just as touchy about negative reviews, but the people I've seen raising the biggest stink about them are people new to the industry.
March 26th, 2007 @ 3:09 AM

Posted by Lucinda:

I'm a book reviewer myself, but I'm on a site where we're not allowed to be snarky. There are times when I wish I could be. The reason people care so much about what you think is because it's been said that "bad reviews from Mrs. Giggles will increase a book's sales". I don't beleive reviews affect sales that much whether they're good or bad. I think that the main purpose of a review is to get snippets for press releases. If it isn't favorable, go on to the next one. Just because you didn't care for my book, doesn't mean that someone else won't. (I won an award and received a 5-Star review for a book you gave a 69 and said was boring.) Big deal! I'm 48-years-old, and I've lived through a lot worse things in my life than getting an unfavorable review.
About the poll, I think what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you're going to out authors, then you should out yourself and tell us who you really are.
On the subject of the router, I do know about such things, and the router doesn't affect the I.P. address.
March 26th, 2007 @ 3:53 AM

Posted by Ciar Cullen:

Nonny, you know I'm a supporter of yours and lubs you, but I disagree a little here. I think those folks, like me, epubbed (and with some hybrid pubs who have put us into stores) are simply focused on a different reviewing world and buzz. Okay, so I don't totally disagree--but I think there's a wrinkle in comparing the two. You won't really see a "NY" author wriggling here over a review, because they've other fish to fry. So the curve may be off. Ya know?
March 26th, 2007 @ 4:31 AM

Posted by Mrs G:

Ms Cullen,

Actually, NY authors did, back when I started out. Then I took a hiatus for 2 years, folks like Smart Bitches and Karen and Bam showed up, and like it or not, NY authors are forced to develop thicker skin, heh heh.
March 26th, 2007 @ 8:59 AM

Posted by Mrs G:

Lucinda,

Who I really am? May I direct you to a page on my website:

http://www.mrsgiggles.com/me.html

It's been there for a while, even before I make the mistake of reviewing your book and putting you through so much unneccesary grief.

I don't mean to insult you, but before you go around calling me a coward for being anonymous, please DO check out the website a little bit more before you make accusations.
March 26th, 2007 @ 9:01 AM

Posted by Ciar Cullen:

I stand corrected, then. Hell with NY, if I gotta be thick-skinned there too. ;o) Yep, they're just beating down the door...
March 26th, 2007 @ 10:17 AM

Posted by Ann(ie):

That's bizarre. I know not everyone is going to like my books. If a critic can give me specific examples of where I went wrong, I can learn from that. Otherwise, I write it off as a subjective difference of opinion. For instance, I heard from one NY editors that I have "a real knack for natural dialogue" and from an editor at a different house, "I didn't warm to her use of dialogue." Blink. So do I or don't I? Depends who you ask.

Another editor said, "the best part of the writing was the sex" and a different editor said, "not sexy enough." So can I write sex scenes well or not? Again, depends who you ask. I hope readers will decide for themselves. If they like it, I hope they let me know. If they don't, I still want to hear why. Maybe I'll nail it the next go-round.
March 26th, 2007 @ 11:36 AM

Posted by Sandy:

Mrs. G, just stop accepting books from authors. That will eliminate these types of goofy, baseless announcements and any possible conflict of interest issues. Not that I can see authors whining about that last one. :P And why be a tool for their egos to begin with? I've seen blogs where authors talk about being "Giggle-ed" or "Giggle-fied" or I don't know what the hell else. Trademark your name while your identity is still yours!
March 26th, 2007 @ 2:26 PM

Posted by Lucinda:

Hmmm? Sounds to me like someone can dish out the criticism, but she can't take it. And don't worry. You'll never get another one of my books. I only sent it to you because everyone else in my writer's group was doing it. I guess if they all jumped off of a bridge, I'd go too...Oh, and BTW, how did you know that "Lucinda" was "L.K. Campbell"? Very interesting!!!
March 27th, 2007 @ 7:14 AM

Posted by Shelli Stevens:

Hey here. You gave me a less than stellar review on a book, but I didn't come and comlain. To each their own. I'd never read your blog until someone posted that you had reviewed my book. So, yes, I am one of those people saying I didn't send you my book. Which can only mean that I should thank you for buying it.
March 27th, 2007 @ 8:39 AM

Posted by Shelli Stevens:

Oops, I meant hey there. Not hey here. :P
March 27th, 2007 @ 8:45 AM

Posted by Jax:

I'll fully admit that I send you my work voluntarily because I am proud of my writing so it doesn't matter if my reviews are mediocre. I'm not afraid to admit it. My only complaint is that sometimes the facts are off. Perhaps you've read so many stories you got the info confused? Of course, it's natural that writers are a bit disgruntled when they're bashed but I find amusement in your site. I've got a thick skin and I will continue sending my stuff because I'm a glutton for punishment. I run a relatively big site myself, so I'm certain you've got a lot to deal with besides the reviews. Kudos for making this place so successful. Everyone's entitled to bitch, even Mrs. Giggles. If you decide you ever want to out yourself, I'll be happy to do it for you interview style!
March 27th, 2007 @ 8:59 AM

Posted by Mrs G:

Lucinda, please stop. You're embarrassing yourself. Your email address shows up as "lkcampbell@lkcampbell.com" so I don't think it's rocket science to make that connection. I also have seen a particular comment of yours on another blog where you say the same thing about me being an anonymous coward as you are saying now. I love how you ignore the fact that I just pointed out that I am not as anonymous as you claim I am and just repeated your same old bitterness around the place in your latest post. So please, let's not embarrass yourself any further, okay? If you really want me to, I'll just delete that review. It's no big deal.

Jax, it will be nice if someone will tell ME where my facts are off so that I can correct them. I'm human, I make mistakes. But I suppose it's nicer to imagine that an accidental typo where I mess up the heroine's name is a deliberate evil on my part.

I don't visit Romance Divas. Let's just say that I dropped by once and realized that if I value my enjoyment of ebooks, I'm better off not visiting that place ever again.
March 27th, 2007 @ 9:01 AM

Posted by Jax:

It sounds to me you're a bit bent out of shape. You try to be nice and you're attacked. Well, I can point out that it wasn't just a typo on the name. It's a whole setting you added that didn't even exist. So that tells me you tend to skim when you get bored or stressed. It's one thing to attack me, but another thing to attack my site. I think you're just intimidated that our reviews are better and more accurate. In fact, we have a rather huge staff and we have editors to make sure there are inconsistencies in data. If we make an error, we're quick to adjust it. We're also quoted in many NY published romances, but I don't see your reviews in any books. We don't need to bash to get our point across. I'm a reviewer and I can guarantee that I check my facts. I'm not here to complain, but since you took it that way, that's your problem.
March 27th, 2007 @ 10:30 AM

Posted by Mrs G:

I'm not attacking you, jax, sheesh. Where did that come from? I'm not even attacking Romance Divas - I didn't want to go there because I can see that I can be influenced by what is being said about me there.

Where did all that "you're just jealous!" thing come from? Give me a break. If I care about being quoted by authors, I'd be doing reviews from Romantic Times.
March 27th, 2007 @ 10:38 AM

Posted by Kristen:

"I don't visit Romance Divas. Let's just say that I dropped by once and realized that if I value my enjoyment of ebooks, I'm better off not visiting that place ever again."

Oh honey, that's the best decision you've ever made. You wouldn't fit in at Romance Divas. See, RD is one of the most supportive sites online. We don't tear each other down or pick each other to pieces just for a good bit of snark. You'd be bored silly. Or shunned completely. You know, something like that. Ciao, darling!
March 27th, 2007 @ 10:41 AM

Posted by Jax:

I'm not saying you're jealous. You misconstrued the point. Perhaps the way you posted made it appear as if you're angry. I'm not angry. I'm laughing as I write this. I've got a good sense of humor and I'm not trying to come off bitchy. Either way authors are going to complain about your reviews and wouldn't it be better if the details were correct? That's all I'm saying.
March 27th, 2007 @ 10:45 AM

Posted by Chrissy:

The truth of the matter is that many authors have found questionable grasp of knowledge in reviews posted by Mrs Giggles. This happens, but not with GOOD reviewers. The other issue is that content on the Romance Divas' forum isn't accessible from anywhere BUT the forum to my knowledge, and a great deal of traffic ends up right here by way of announcements... couple that with some long quotes from Diva blogs and it really does look like you, Mrs Giggles, are lying. Many of the books reviewed with errors seemed to have been skimmed, or (gasp) supplemented with Amazon quotage.
Let's all hope everyone is wrong.
But when one is critical of books with authors' names clearly printed on the cover while cowering behind a pseudonym, one opens oneself up to attack. And I wonder why somebody who was a NON member of Divas would "drop by once" and form such a well rounded opinion of the top Romance Writing site on the Internet? (The site has a sterling, well deserved reputation, I add happily.)
I still don't understand why Romance Divas would in any way involve your enjoyment of ebooks. I'm further befuzzled at the notion of "dropping by once" and being so scarred for life by the experience.
For public record: if many (three in the past hour alone) legitimate authors have publicly stated that they DID NOT SEND Mrs Giggles copies of their work, and several claim to have facts incorrectly cited by Mrs Giggles, is this some sort of vast Romance Conspiracy perpetrated by the demonic hoard of perfectly-nice-writers-who-have-no-reason-to-lie or is Mrs Giggles full of something less than giggly?
Film at 11:00?
Probably not. :P
Tick tick tick tick tick... DING DING DING! Your fifteen minutes of fame are officially up.
Have a nice day.
March 27th, 2007 @ 10:48 AM

Posted by Night Diva Maria:

Jax is right, there have been many inconsistancies in reviews here. And it's major things like plot or setting or something far more than names. You don't trash Divas. Why? Because at Romance Divas we have something unique. Something special that goes beyound the bottom line in publishing. We have a family that sticks by one another through thick and thin, bad reviews and great ones. Nothing beats the support from romance writers that care for one another. Bitchiness isn't needed there. Warm fuzzy feelings and encouragement of fellow human beings is always welcome. Is it for blowing smoke up someone's ass? No. But it is for helping others improve their best they can be.
March 27th, 2007 @ 10:49 AM

Posted by Mrs G:

For god's sake, I didn't trash the Divas. Call off the mobs. And Chrissy, I've been around since 1999 so please, I've been doing this when you've yet to learn how to spell "snark". Go check the Internet time-travel machine - I'm not a 15-min sensation. It's like I said to Lucinda, please do check before you say such things. I don't know where you get off saying that I'm lying either. Do you know what you're talking about or are you just sharing the same dinner table as Lucinda?

As for the mistakes, I've said before - if you let me know what they are, I'll check and correct them if they really are mistakes. If you want to get on your high horse and keep complaining, however, there's nothing I can do to stop you or change your mind. La di da, really.
March 27th, 2007 @ 11:00 AM

Posted by Babe:

I know for me your review was sort of like the challenge of running across hot coals, not that you said anything I didn't agree with. But it was more like ..submit, run like heck, laugh about it later that I didn't get incinerated. And in a strange, masochistic way, it was fun. :)
March 27th, 2007 @ 11:43 AM

Posted by Chrissy:

If I had, in any response I can find here, used the word "snark," I would have spelled it correctly.
If we're talking about checking things... umm Pot-- I believe you have an incoming call from Kettle?
March 27th, 2007 @ 11:47 AM

Posted by Mrs G:

Chrissy, do stop while you're ahead. You're making me look good, which is probably not your intention, lol.
March 27th, 2007 @ 12:07 PM

Posted by bam:

"Tick tick tick tick tick... DING DING DING! Your fifteen minutes of fame are officially up. Have a nice day."

Dude... Mrs. G. has been around forever. She ain't going nowhere. She's a frickin' institution.

Btw, mrs. G., I... uh... am going to send you my book. I've been reading your site since I was a kidlet and now that I'm published myself, I would consider it an honor if you review it.
March 27th, 2007 @ 11:39 PM

Posted by Jane:

That sucks that the site loads so slow. Must look into that.

As for Mrs. Giggles' fame going away? Hell no. She matters to those who count,i.e., the readers who purchase books. My reading tastes aren't closely aligned with Mrs. Giggles' but the fact is that her opinions matter to me because I know that they are honest.

I can't imagine what authors expect when sending you a book? All hugs and kitties? Sheesh.
March 28th, 2007 @ 12:00 AM

Posted by Hester:

Seems like Lucinda was really affected by your no-so-good review (69 points out of a 100 is not bad), Mrs.G. Eventhough she said it's no big deal, she felt the need to meantion the award and the 5 stars, and keep on calling u a coward.
It's so obvious that she's very bitter about the poor review u gave her. :P
March 28th, 2007 @ 1:54 AM

Posted by Shannon Stacey:

How come every romance author on the planet but me seems to know how to send books to Mrs. G?

Somebody let the slow kid here in the back in on the secret, dammit.
March 28th, 2007 @ 2:17 AM

Posted by Ann Wesley Hardin:

Uh, Shan. You email it to her :P

*runs away*
March 28th, 2007 @ 2:51 AM

Posted by Ann Wesley Hardin:

Oh ok. There's an "About & Contact" link on the top left. There. I've done my good deed. After I got the mocking in, of course.
March 28th, 2007 @ 2:53 AM

Posted by Shannon Stacey:

*throws snowball after Ann*

Well, doh. But there are different formats and such...clearly not everybody possesses my ability to obsess a matter absolutely to death.

Email me, Ann, because if I have to get up off my butt and chase you, my feather boa might fall off.
March 28th, 2007 @ 2:55 AM

Posted by Ann Wesley Hardin:

*hurls slushy gmail at Shan*

It's kinda fun playing in here while Mrs. G sleeps on the other side of the world. Anyone want to help with a snowman? Who's got carrots? We already know who has coal. Heeheeheehee.
March 28th, 2007 @ 3:05 AM

Posted by Robin:

Can you say "backlash"?

Take heart, Mrs. G; all this scuffling simply means that reviewers who don't love love love every Romance novel they review are finally gaining a foothold in the Romance community. It's only a matter of time until Harriet Klausner is officially dethroned from her position as #1 Amazon "reviewer."

Some people only want to read "nice" reviews, and some people enjoy the snarkier ones. Some people don't want any critiquing of reviewed books, some appreciate a more critical examination of a book in a review. There's plenty of room for everyone here.

What I don't understand is why a *person* is being attacked as mean for criticizing *books*. Am I the only one who sees the irony there?

As for mistakes in reviews, I notice them everywhere, in both non-critical (aka "nice") and critical reviews alike. Of course no one thinks they make those mistakes or they wouldn't make them in the first place (that's why they're mistakes, for heaven's sake!). Sometimes they bother me, but if a reviewer is open to changing the error (and if it's really an error and not a difference of opinion), I don't think you can get better than that.
March 28th, 2007 @ 3:12 AM

Posted by Barbara B.:

I don't think Mrs. Giggles is in any imminent danger. She's been around for 7 or 8 years. SHE's not the johnnie-come-lately.

Who are these women anyway? I've been reading romance reviews blogs for several years now and I have to admit to being totally unaware of the Romance Divas. I checked their website and they seem to be a writers site but there are also reviews. I find that very strange. Reviews coming from a writers website. Very strange indeed. I think I'll stick to Mrs. Giggles (alleged errors and all) and the other independent reader/reviewers.

What's the fuss anyway? Aren't the Romance Divas set up for those in the romance industry? Why begrudge readers their resources?
March 28th, 2007 @ 3:59 AM

Posted by Sybil:

Oh my... let me guess Romance Divas next class will be how to make yourself look stupid in under 10 words or less?

Good god there is so much wrong here I don't even know where to start. But that has never stopped me before...

first... all good internet sleuths should know if you put your URL or Email in the lil box that asks for it ::whispers::it-displays-to-the-world-and/or-blogowner::/whisper::

Seriously that makes your claim to 'KNOW' Mrs. G is someone else scream you know what the hell you are talking about. Mad computer skilz going on there.

second... People who run the NUMBER ONE site on the net, should know if they are all happy, happy, joy, joy and wanting to buy the world a coke - not to send their shit to Mrs. G. Maybe the site wasn't easy enough for you to understand? That speaks volumes for your site, books and detective skills.

third... Since the authors pay you to help with the costs of the site, board and whatever... is it suppose to be shocking you are supportive? That you are quoted? So is Harriet Klauser, I think Romance Divas fit in the romance world about the same way.

But really it isn't difficult to get quoted in a book, I am sure you know this being all knowing and shit. Obviously much easier to get a NY publisher to put you in print for a nice quote than it is for your prose eh? Of course I am quoted, so again I say, it isn't a big deal. In fact I am pretty sure Mrs. G is and people would take her quote a hell of a lot more seriously.

But hey don't cry in your milk, I am sure giggles doesn't visit my site either. So it isn't just you. Damn you giggles! You should soooooooo love me! And I gonna go trash you on my blog to prove it! That will teach you a lesson! And when you are all sad and come to see the light, I will allow you to visit but don't expect me to be nice to you. hmmm I may need to sign up for that 10 words or less class... wonder if I can fit that in with my coming soon glamour shot photo sho
March 28th, 2007 @ 4:13 AM

Posted by Karen Scott:

Do you want me to bitchslap these effing Pollyanna's for you Mrs G?

I'm still pissing myself at the fact that they think you're jealous over their sugary sweet, all-books-are-the-fucking-shiznit review site.

They obviously know not who you are.

Well, you know what they say, there's a fucktard born every minute.
March 28th, 2007 @ 8:08 AM

Posted by Mrs G:

Thanks, folks, but as I've said in another post, let's not turn this into a Mrs Giggles versus Romance Divas battle. It's a misunderstanding between me and jax that I admit I play a part to causing with a badly-worded sentence and several Divas overreacted. I have nothing against the Divas and personally would love nothing better than to see this issue die down.
March 28th, 2007 @ 8:46 AM

Posted by Lucinda:

Uh, Hester, have you ever since an ass. Well, here's mine. Kiss it!
March 28th, 2007 @ 9:11 AM

Posted by Jen:

I've never commented on this site before, but I have been reading Mrs. Giggles faithfully for, oh, maybe 4-5 years now. I don't always agree with her reviews... in fact, I'm one of those readers who will buy a book based on the strength of a BAD review. I know what Mrs. Giggles likes and I know what I like and I can recognize when we diverge (I prefer virginal heroines, for example). But more importantly, I'm a romance reader (of both print and ebooks), the target demographic, the person that authors need to reach and attract. And I promise that you're not going to gain my business by attacking a reviewer I (and many other readers, I'm sure) respect (and that includes the ladies of dearauthor and Karen and Bam, other "snarky" reviewers whose blogs I frequent and whose views I respect).

Attacking Mrs. Giggles only makes you the author look bad-- I'm unlikely to purchase from an Author Behaving Badly... and as a reader, I'm the person you need to reach.
It's not the review that makes you look bad. It's the way you respond to the review that says volumes.

Incidentally, I have never ever understood the hoopla over negative reviews. Do you think Roger Ebert is a bad person for critiquing movies? Should Entertainment Weekly only publish A reviews? Why should book reviews be any different? We the readers are under no obligation unilaterally to support mediocre romances simply because we like the romance genre.
March 28th, 2007 @ 10:06 AM

Post New Comment

No Smilies More Smilies »
Please type the letters you see