Have you ever felt that way?
I have. More than once.
Conflicts come in many forms but in this case it's regarding the making of a decision. Do I or don't I? Should I or shouldn't I? Can I or Can't I? Will I or won't I?
Doesn't matter how you ask it, the important fact is, the question has to be asked and answered.
In my last post, Everyone's a Critic, I mentioned about conflict of interest and how it can compromise your review.
This post explores a different aspect of the same beast.
When you review because you feel as though you ought, because of friend, crit partner or any other emotional bent, the previous post explained why you should say 'no'.
I want to touch upon those folks that review for more than one site, or those that like to post their review of the same book on multiple venues like Amazon, Goodreads, etc.
Writing a review for those places is fine.
What this post is hoping to achieve is to create in a reviewer an awareness of consequences.
First, I understand the emotional satisfaction of being accepted as a preferred reader for such places as NetGalley or Edelweiss. Being able to read books long before the general public has access is a natural high for any fan of the written word. It's wonderful.
When isn't it wonderful?
When it skews statistics. When it divides your loyalties. When it causes conflict. When it inadvertently leads to accusations of plagiarism. When intellectual property is threatened. All of this is possible.
Once again I need to clarify that this post is geared to those reviewers who review for a professional site. To sharpen the focus further, this is targeted to those sites who also, in their professional capacity, have contracts with those same NetGalley kinds of sites.
The question should be: Who do I review for?
The answer: One or the other, NOT BOTH.
I repeat: You can not review the Same book for BOTH sites - or a multiple of sites.
But you ask: Why not, especially if I write a completely different review?
First - and the obvious: Unless your opinion of the book (like vs dislike) has changed drastically (which it shouldn't), you are sharing the same opinion. As such, and which brings me to the second point, you are skewing the statistics. If you share reviews on Goodreads, Amazon, the review site you belong to, and anywhere else where statistics matter, then you are not allowing an honest and fair assessment of the book to occur.
It's almost like being a shill at an auction - driving the price up so the item will sell for a higher price than is warranted, than it otherwise would.
I realize that's not what most people intend. I say 'most' because there ARE unscrupulous people out there. But the effect is the same. If you share your review with four sites, it looks as though four different people are liking the book for the same reasons, but in actuality, the number is one - you. Multiply you by 100 doing the same thing and think about how that affects the book. If the publisher thinks that many great reviews are out there, they equate that to sales. But take away the You Effect and what is the reality? Three HUNDRED of those reviews are invalid.
Did you ever think about that?
Another conflict is this.
If you take a book from NetGalley under your own name, you can NOT review the book for anyone else or anywhere else. It has to be your own personal blog. That is what NetGalley expects from you because that's the agreement. By the same token, if you review for a site that also contracts with NetGalley, they can't use the book that YOU personally took from NetGalley.
Only books that THEY request from NetGalley can be reviewed on THEIR site.
In other words: NetGalley and Edelweiss expect you to post the review on your own website or blog, and don't mind that you do it on Goodreads. You'd be linking back to your own personal blog anyway. The problem arises when a professional website, like LASR, (not a personal review blog) has their own account, but their reviewers are posting the NetGalley reviews on their personal NetGalley account and not the professional website.
Do you see the conflict? Do you understand where I'm going with this?
Intellectual property is serious business. Whether you get paid or not - monetarily, in books, or you do it out of the sheer joy of sharing, when you submit a review that will reflect the site, the reputation of the site, and will be credited to the site, it becomes the property of the site.
What is NetGalley is NetGalley's.
What is Edelweiss is Edelweiss'.
What is a professional review site is the professional review site's.
What is LASR is LASR's.
The goal of this post was to enlighten, guide and teach reviewers about another aspect of reviewing. The business side. And how every review you write has greater worth than the apparent.
You matter.
What you think, matters.
What you say, matters.
Where and how you share it, matters.
End the conflict.
Make the right decision.
Because your decision, matters.
Showing posts with label avoid. Show all posts
Showing posts with label avoid. Show all posts
Monday, October 7, 2013
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Reviewing Isn't Singing Along with Toby Keith
I actually enjoy Talk About Me and it's great to sing along with - if I can keep up.
The lyrics that stick with me are these:
"I like talking about you you you you, usually, but occasionally
I wanna talk about me (me,me,me,me- background singers)
I wanna talk about meeeeeeee (me,me- background singers)
(I wanna talk about me- background singers)mmmm me me me me
(I wanna talk about me- background singers)mmmm me me me me
You you you you you you you you you you you you you
I wanna talk about ME!"
What does Toby Keith's song have to do with reviewing? It is perfect to illustrate what readers should see in a review. If I'm writing the review, you want to know what I felt, what I saw, how I was affected, what I liked, what I didn't, what I observed and what I looked for and what I found and what I didn't find. Did I laugh, did I cry, did I faint from the scorching love scenes or fall asleep or did I want to rush out and tell everyone to read this book; all those things are points that make a review valuable to a potential buyer of a book. What do they have in common? Me! My opinion.
What I do not want to see is you: You will like this..., You will absolutely love..., You will cry when ..., You will want to ...., You will come to believe..., You must..., You are going to .... You you you you you.
Seriously, how can a reviewer possibly anticipate a reader reacting the same as the reviewer?
There are times when "You" can be fine to use.
"You might remember the old adage, "It takes a thief to catch a thief".
At that point the reviewer is talking to the reader, drawing them in by using a common analogy or reference to make their point. Nowhere in the above example is the reviewer telling the reader what they will do. It's being chatty, and that's fine. But when reviewers persist in talking...no telling the reader how to do this or that, then it ceases being a sharing of opinion and comes across as shaking a figurative finger at the reader with authority, "You will laugh...!" "You will do this...after reading this scene, chapter, book."
I don't think so.
To flip Mr. Keith's lyrics around from "I like talking about you you you you, usually, but occasionally
I wanna talk about me."
It should be "I like talking about me me me me me, usually, but occasionally I can talk about you."
It's hard to refrain from You-ing all over the place. A reviewer might do it because they feel that they're writing it in a way that might relate better to the reader. It's not. It's telling. A review is your opinion and you are sharing about how the book, characters, dialogue, setting or sex scenes affected you. Or not.
I need to see, "I was amazed!" not, "You will be amazed." You can't possibly know that.
When I see a review telling me to do this or that, I get all huffy and want to stomp up to my soap box and hold up a neon sign that says STOP! I don't like to see someone telling me how I'm going to react to the same book they're talking about. That's for me to decide. I can only hope that I'll derive the same sense of enjoyment, awe, surprise or excitement out of the book as the reviewer. But I can't be told to.
A reviewer's goal is to Make me want to experience those same things by hooking me, intriguing me, teasing me and painting with words that show me their enthusiasm and observations enough that it piques my interest, whets my appetite and encourages me to go and read the book for myself.
Me.
Before you submit your review, look it over to see if you are sharing your opinion or telling.
Too much telling in a book can drag down the review rating. Telling in a review is just as unwelcome.
Please be aware folks. And when writing, think in your head, 'talk about me'.
The lyrics that stick with me are these:
"I like talking about you you you you, usually, but occasionally
I wanna talk about me (me,me,me,me- background singers)
I wanna talk about meeeeeeee (me,me- background singers)
(I wanna talk about me- background singers)mmmm me me me me
(I wanna talk about me- background singers)mmmm me me me me
You you you you you you you you you you you you you
I wanna talk about ME!"
What does Toby Keith's song have to do with reviewing? It is perfect to illustrate what readers should see in a review. If I'm writing the review, you want to know what I felt, what I saw, how I was affected, what I liked, what I didn't, what I observed and what I looked for and what I found and what I didn't find. Did I laugh, did I cry, did I faint from the scorching love scenes or fall asleep or did I want to rush out and tell everyone to read this book; all those things are points that make a review valuable to a potential buyer of a book. What do they have in common? Me! My opinion.
What I do not want to see is you: You will like this..., You will absolutely love..., You will cry when ..., You will want to ...., You will come to believe..., You must..., You are going to .... You you you you you.
Seriously, how can a reviewer possibly anticipate a reader reacting the same as the reviewer?
There are times when "You" can be fine to use.
"You might remember the old adage, "It takes a thief to catch a thief".
At that point the reviewer is talking to the reader, drawing them in by using a common analogy or reference to make their point. Nowhere in the above example is the reviewer telling the reader what they will do. It's being chatty, and that's fine. But when reviewers persist in talking...no telling the reader how to do this or that, then it ceases being a sharing of opinion and comes across as shaking a figurative finger at the reader with authority, "You will laugh...!" "You will do this...after reading this scene, chapter, book."
I don't think so.
To flip Mr. Keith's lyrics around from "I like talking about you you you you, usually, but occasionally
I wanna talk about me."
It should be "I like talking about me me me me me, usually, but occasionally I can talk about you."
It's hard to refrain from You-ing all over the place. A reviewer might do it because they feel that they're writing it in a way that might relate better to the reader. It's not. It's telling. A review is your opinion and you are sharing about how the book, characters, dialogue, setting or sex scenes affected you. Or not.
I need to see, "I was amazed!" not, "You will be amazed." You can't possibly know that.
When I see a review telling me to do this or that, I get all huffy and want to stomp up to my soap box and hold up a neon sign that says STOP! I don't like to see someone telling me how I'm going to react to the same book they're talking about. That's for me to decide. I can only hope that I'll derive the same sense of enjoyment, awe, surprise or excitement out of the book as the reviewer. But I can't be told to.
A reviewer's goal is to Make me want to experience those same things by hooking me, intriguing me, teasing me and painting with words that show me their enthusiasm and observations enough that it piques my interest, whets my appetite and encourages me to go and read the book for myself.
Me.
Before you submit your review, look it over to see if you are sharing your opinion or telling.
Too much telling in a book can drag down the review rating. Telling in a review is just as unwelcome.
Please be aware folks. And when writing, think in your head, 'talk about me'.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Keep The Negative in the Closet
Happy New Year! It's been awhile but reviewing goes on. Thank goodness for that.
In previous posts, I've mentioned how a review is subjective. It's an opinion and everyone has different tastes or expectations. That has not changed.
What needs to change and what reviewers need to be aware of, are the kinds of personal opinions that should not be in a review.
I'm talking about making the decision for a reader that a book isn't worth the money because of its size. I've mentioned before that a reviewer should not rate a review lower just because the formatting is wonky on their electronic reading device - Kindle or NOOK. (Pinned Down to the Mat)
Today, I'm adding another "AVOID THIS".
Please, do not make negative or disparaging comments about a book because of its size. Or because it was a part of a series and you 'felt lost', or because you checked the publisher website and felt the price was too much for such a short story. A tale can be told well in as little as twenty pages. Does that mean that people should not buy it because of its length and miss out on a well crafted tale? No.
A reviewer's role is to comment on the content of a book. What is inside that makes it the story it is. The characters, plot, dialogue, setting, personal interaction between protagonist and antagonist are all topics that readers expect to see discussed. Do not anticipate that a reader is going to be disappointed at the length or the price of the book. Do not let personal feelings distract you from the contents. Don't presume that you can speak for all readers.
Speaking of speaking, be alert to tales from across the pond. What do I mean?: "spelled" is "spelt", color is "colour", a 'dustman' is a garbage collector, tire is "tyre", check is "cheque", and humor is "humour".
If your book takes place in England or Australia, or more likely, the publisher is based there, then words spelled in that manner will pepper the story. Do NOT take points off the rating for these. They are not evidence of bad editing or typographical errors. They are geographically and culturally correct. If the British spelling bothers you bad enough to want to drag down the rating, return it. Or better yet, learn to enjoy the unique flavor reading books from other countries can provide and expand your trivia for Jeopardy.
Another thing that I've noticed - reviews being written about a type or genre never before attempted. On the whole, that is a very good thing. It shows the reviewer is expanding their reading base. The downside is a review riddled with negatives because the parameters of this new sub-genre are not only foreign to them, but perhaps outside their comfort zone. They inadvertently try to paint it with the same brush as the comfortable "old shoe" genres they already read. By doing that, of course, it won't rate high - hence a negative review.
If such is the case, don't review it. If you are lucky enough to be a part of a review site that lets reviewers pick and chose the books they’ll read, return it.
I have a suggestion for you. Instead, before choosing a book in a new kind of story technique or subject, investigate how the genre reads before attempting to review it. Find out what is normal and typical for style. Read other reviews to get an idea of what it's all about. You'd be doing yourself and readers of your reviews a huge favor.
Another aspect to keep in mind - a reader may very well have been following a series or a reader may be buying from a site that specializes in short stories of fifty pages or less because that fits their needs. You know what that means, right? That they find treasure in something you want to trash. You see, a reader is as variable as the books that get published. Their reading needs are fluid so some days a short eighteen page erotic romp between a were-wolf, a were-mink and the farmer's widow is just right. The next week that same reader will crave a high-brow murder mystery with emotional elements even Oprah would swoon over.
A reviewer needs to be objectively subjective. If a reviewer is concerned that they might accidentally request a book that is part of a series and they usually avoid those because they don't like feeling left out, check the publisher website before asking for the title. Quite a few list all the books in a series. Some author's sites do the same.
Additionally, there are many books out there that are part of a series and yet are complete unto themselves. But don't assume. If a reviewer does end up with a soap opera type tale where you really do need to understand what went on before, but there was enough to entertain you and keep you because it was that good - then resist making it a negative. Just give a reader a heads-up. Like this:
"This book totally kept my interest and it had a lot going for it. I had fun and I enjoyed the snappy dialogue between the hero and heroine. However, I need to give readers a heads up that this isn't a standalone read. I could tell there were pieces missing and I also realized that my reading experience could have been richer had I read some of the previous books in the series. As it is, it's definitely worth checking out. It has certainly whetted my appetite for more and I can't wait to find out!"
This example lets a reader know that it is enjoyable while giving voice to something positive. It also gives the information that it's a part of a series and while not a standalone, that the reviewer was able to enjoy the story as is. For first time readers, they'll understand what the book offers and what it lacks. In no way does it allow a reviewer's disappointment to color the review with a negative flavor. And remember, for followers of the series, they are going to want to know what works in the story as it is. They know what’s going on, so please avoid trashing it just because you didn’t.
Taking this one step further – I agree that a really super awesome book will not leave a reader feeling like they missed one of the main courses in their five course meal. I also know that books in a series can and do give you a complete tale while leaving cookie crumbs about the overall story arc. Be aware that there are publishers that excel at and promote short stories in a serial manner, much like the old T.V. cliff hangers. Once all the installments are revealed, they’ll then publish a “collection” which condenses them all into one giant volume.
Know your publishers.
If that is the style they are known for and you’re not a serial reader, then avoid reviewing the installments. Wait for the collection. Or read tales from a different publisher. But don’t paint a story in a negative light for things outside of the actual contents in a book (book length, cost, unfamiliar genre).
There are enough reasons to rate a book lower, from plot holes an elephant can fall through, lazy editing (let's call the hero different names), alpha men who wail and squeal and waffle, heroines who aren’t assertive but abrasive and unlikable (you want to make her go down those squeaky stairs into that dark musty cellar with the creepy scratchy noises when the lightbulb pops), and dialogue that doesn’t match the characters’ personalities (A regal queen talking like a punk rocker on steroids), just to name a few.
Please remember: review the book, the story, the part that people read. Everything else is up to them.
In previous posts, I've mentioned how a review is subjective. It's an opinion and everyone has different tastes or expectations. That has not changed.
What needs to change and what reviewers need to be aware of, are the kinds of personal opinions that should not be in a review.
I'm talking about making the decision for a reader that a book isn't worth the money because of its size. I've mentioned before that a reviewer should not rate a review lower just because the formatting is wonky on their electronic reading device - Kindle or NOOK. (Pinned Down to the Mat)
Today, I'm adding another "AVOID THIS".
Please, do not make negative or disparaging comments about a book because of its size. Or because it was a part of a series and you 'felt lost', or because you checked the publisher website and felt the price was too much for such a short story. A tale can be told well in as little as twenty pages. Does that mean that people should not buy it because of its length and miss out on a well crafted tale? No.
A reviewer's role is to comment on the content of a book. What is inside that makes it the story it is. The characters, plot, dialogue, setting, personal interaction between protagonist and antagonist are all topics that readers expect to see discussed. Do not anticipate that a reader is going to be disappointed at the length or the price of the book. Do not let personal feelings distract you from the contents. Don't presume that you can speak for all readers.
Speaking of speaking, be alert to tales from across the pond. What do I mean?: "spelled" is "spelt", color is "colour", a 'dustman' is a garbage collector, tire is "tyre", check is "cheque", and humor is "humour".
If your book takes place in England or Australia, or more likely, the publisher is based there, then words spelled in that manner will pepper the story. Do NOT take points off the rating for these. They are not evidence of bad editing or typographical errors. They are geographically and culturally correct. If the British spelling bothers you bad enough to want to drag down the rating, return it. Or better yet, learn to enjoy the unique flavor reading books from other countries can provide and expand your trivia for Jeopardy.
Another thing that I've noticed - reviews being written about a type or genre never before attempted. On the whole, that is a very good thing. It shows the reviewer is expanding their reading base. The downside is a review riddled with negatives because the parameters of this new sub-genre are not only foreign to them, but perhaps outside their comfort zone. They inadvertently try to paint it with the same brush as the comfortable "old shoe" genres they already read. By doing that, of course, it won't rate high - hence a negative review.
If such is the case, don't review it. If you are lucky enough to be a part of a review site that lets reviewers pick and chose the books they’ll read, return it.
I have a suggestion for you. Instead, before choosing a book in a new kind of story technique or subject, investigate how the genre reads before attempting to review it. Find out what is normal and typical for style. Read other reviews to get an idea of what it's all about. You'd be doing yourself and readers of your reviews a huge favor.
Another aspect to keep in mind - a reader may very well have been following a series or a reader may be buying from a site that specializes in short stories of fifty pages or less because that fits their needs. You know what that means, right? That they find treasure in something you want to trash. You see, a reader is as variable as the books that get published. Their reading needs are fluid so some days a short eighteen page erotic romp between a were-wolf, a were-mink and the farmer's widow is just right. The next week that same reader will crave a high-brow murder mystery with emotional elements even Oprah would swoon over.
A reviewer needs to be objectively subjective. If a reviewer is concerned that they might accidentally request a book that is part of a series and they usually avoid those because they don't like feeling left out, check the publisher website before asking for the title. Quite a few list all the books in a series. Some author's sites do the same.
Additionally, there are many books out there that are part of a series and yet are complete unto themselves. But don't assume. If a reviewer does end up with a soap opera type tale where you really do need to understand what went on before, but there was enough to entertain you and keep you because it was that good - then resist making it a negative. Just give a reader a heads-up. Like this:
"This book totally kept my interest and it had a lot going for it. I had fun and I enjoyed the snappy dialogue between the hero and heroine. However, I need to give readers a heads up that this isn't a standalone read. I could tell there were pieces missing and I also realized that my reading experience could have been richer had I read some of the previous books in the series. As it is, it's definitely worth checking out. It has certainly whetted my appetite for more and I can't wait to find out!"
This example lets a reader know that it is enjoyable while giving voice to something positive. It also gives the information that it's a part of a series and while not a standalone, that the reviewer was able to enjoy the story as is. For first time readers, they'll understand what the book offers and what it lacks. In no way does it allow a reviewer's disappointment to color the review with a negative flavor. And remember, for followers of the series, they are going to want to know what works in the story as it is. They know what’s going on, so please avoid trashing it just because you didn’t.
Taking this one step further – I agree that a really super awesome book will not leave a reader feeling like they missed one of the main courses in their five course meal. I also know that books in a series can and do give you a complete tale while leaving cookie crumbs about the overall story arc. Be aware that there are publishers that excel at and promote short stories in a serial manner, much like the old T.V. cliff hangers. Once all the installments are revealed, they’ll then publish a “collection” which condenses them all into one giant volume.
Know your publishers.
If that is the style they are known for and you’re not a serial reader, then avoid reviewing the installments. Wait for the collection. Or read tales from a different publisher. But don’t paint a story in a negative light for things outside of the actual contents in a book (book length, cost, unfamiliar genre).
There are enough reasons to rate a book lower, from plot holes an elephant can fall through, lazy editing (let's call the hero different names), alpha men who wail and squeal and waffle, heroines who aren’t assertive but abrasive and unlikable (you want to make her go down those squeaky stairs into that dark musty cellar with the creepy scratchy noises when the lightbulb pops), and dialogue that doesn’t match the characters’ personalities (A regal queen talking like a punk rocker on steroids), just to name a few.
Please remember: review the book, the story, the part that people read. Everything else is up to them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)