Be Good To Me

I loved that song by Tina Turner back in the day. Better Be Good To Me

It reminded me about something.
It reminded me about professionalism.
It reinforced that respect has its place and is a necessary component in every aspect of our lives.
It made me remember that T.V. has a strong influence on our opinions and it's not always a positive outcome.

I see it in sitcoms, Reality T.V. and children's cartoons. It's rubbing off on society as a whole. Sure, it has its place and some instances, it's needed and to the point. But if we aren't careful, it could become a habit, a way of interacting that spills over into aspects of our lives we don't intend it to. And that absolutely includes writing a review.

What am I referring to? It goes by many names because it's considered a gray area. Snark. I.E.: Sarcasm. Causticity. Derision. Disparagement. Scorn. Contempt. Disrespect. Sneering.

Let me put it like this, and it's a quote from a respected author regarding a scathing review that appeared on Amazon.

"...have this Simon Cowell mentality that you have to be cruel in order to get your point across as to how much you hate the book or the performance or in this case, the romance genre in general."

In a nut shell - it comes across as a lack of respect.

Some review sites channel their inner Simon Cowell. They don't call him Judge Dread for nothing. He might be entertaining on television, but his style does not translate well to writing reviews for romance books. Some people need to be reminded of that. Despite and in spite of the review blogs that are out there that cater to that mind set, it's not what everyone looks for.

My advice? Before you review for a site, check with the site owners or, if they have it, the list of criteria or FAQs that might provide information about the tone or style of their reviews and what they look for.

Read some of their published reviews and get a feel for what they typically accept. And that includes whether they care to edit their reviews or leave them as they are. If they leave them as submitted, that means the onus is on the reviewer to edit and present a coherent review. If the review site cares, that is.

If your writing is cutting edge with clever quips and snark and they love that type of writing, then you've found a home.

By the same token, if they are more about information, fairness, respect and articulate coverage of what works and objective comments on what doesn't without resorting to flaming prose, and that's what you prefer to share, then that's the review site to join.

Long and Short Reviews' readers don't get snark at all. They don't get the flamboyant and/or the exaggerated. Nor the mean, the cutting or the brutal type of opinions that can turn off reader and author alike.

Usually readers look for solid, well written, professional and trustworthy reviews. They want someone who can articulate without resorting to flashy verbiage or the current fad lexicon of the moment, certainly they don't want a review that makes them cringe from the harshness of the comments.

And that's where the title, Be Good To Me, comes in.
Respect yourself as a reviewer.
Respect the author's work.

Please don't make any criticism personal by making disparaging comments that allude to a negative reflection of the author. The author is not being reviewed, the book is. The story is. The technique is. The dialogue is. The plot is.

Please don't confuse enthusiasm with outlandish vocabulary: gonna, wanna, yo', bitchin', any profanity, slang spelling and slang vernacular.

Please treat the literary work, short or long, with respect.
Especially short stories.

Don't get angry because you felt it wasn't long enough. If it's a short story, it's a short story. It focuses on ONE aspect, ONE development thread and if that is not enough? Don't read short stories.

Know your personal expectations and choose books accordingly.
It's not a fault if the book is short.
It's wrong to use that reason to lower a book's rating.
Do you know what that is like?
It's like ordering one scoop of ice cream and getting upset because it didn't fill you up like two scoops.
One scoop of ice cream is like a short story. Remember that.

I tried to find an example of snark that insults not only the author but the book. I tried to find something that incorporated the don'ts - like swearing, while also providing what those other review blogs have, entertaining snark. I stumbled upon this video regarding a series that I actually enjoy. I overlook a lot of stuff that drives many readers wonky. I don't know what it is, but I have enjoyed every book in the series for what it gives me in that book alone.

Obviously, this particular Vlog has made video snarking an artform.
If a reviewer was to put in writing for LASR what is in this clip: synopsis, a bit of spoiler, profanity and yes, snark, it would never see the light of day. SNARK THEATER for one of the Anita Blake books.

I think it makes the point.

What Do You Mean,"I'm Predictable and Contrived"?

If you recall from past posts, I've opened up the option of visitors or commenters offering something they'd like to see discussed here.  Just in time for the new year, someone had something mentioned in a review and was bemused, perplexed and a bit taken aback because there was no meat to the heat.

What do I mean?  The author can understand the opinion but without giving a hint as to what made it contrived and/or predictable, the author can't adjust, fix or advance in her craft to address that which the reviewer thought let her/him down.

Yes, I realize what we reviewers say is mostly opinion but if what we say didn't matter, review sites would have cyber-crickets for readers.  Thing is, reviews matter and often do become helpful tools for authors to know not only what doesn't work but what does work. 

Although this is my blog and I'm only one voice in the vast array of reviewers out there,  I think it's good to hear from the other side of the coin, in this case, the author.  

With her permission and because I think it's a valid point and I do try to express the meat behind the heat in my own reviews, I'm going to share:

"if you write a review...and have less than glowing things to say, there is always a good chance you're right or at least what you have to say has merit, BUT think about it from the perspective of the author...if there is something bad or less than stellar, wouldn't you want to KNOW what's wrong? Simply saying something is poor or written badly isn't wrong, per se, but you might want to say why it's written badly. Did the author use purple prose? Repetitive statements? Plot seem so far out of left field you couldn't buy into it? If it's predictable, first, remember that in romance we WANT a HEA...we want to see the hero and heroine get together. BUT, how else was it predictable? Did the hero seem to show up at the right time? Did the heroine seem to say exactly what was needed to cool the hero down?

If you're the author, you want to know so you know what to improve for next time. We're human, so we know we make goof-ups. It happens. But if we don't know why you think something is less than stellar, we can't work on it for the next story."


I think her statements are worth reading.  And, in previous posts here a CC, I think I've addressed the need for reviewers to put what scenes or elements make them feel anything, good or bad.  Making a blanket general statement is perhaps fine on Amazon where there is a thirty second attention span. But on a review site where a reviewer is free to explore and expound upon the virtues of a book and they don't ... it's a let down.

In a book I recently reviewed, the word 'contrived' came to mind. There was more than enough to drag it down to a three rating so I didn't feel the need to heap on the negatives.  I will share that the overall affect of the story for me was that it was forced. Events that would otherwise not occur in such a fashion were compelled to happen just so the opportunities for their sexual relationship could be explored.  Yes, it was a short story and I realize they are very challenging to write. However, I've read shorts before that had a logical and natural progression with characters acting within the world building -- not against it as this book did.   It felt as though the scenes were written at a whim to make a certain thing occur and it felt rushed and shallow.  It had enough elements and dialogue for me to find enjoyment, hence the three rating, but by no means would that kind of writing end up on my keeper shelf.     If I had written in the review that the book was contrived, I would have pointed out what made it so without spoilers. Being contrived isn't necessarily a death knell for a story, just a point reduction as far as a review goes. (unless you were reading a mystery, then it just might)  Combine it with other things, like bad editing or a heroine TSTL, well then, that might sink the ship.  

So what do you think?  Is a book being predictable or contrived enough to make it a wall-banger? Is it enough to state that opinion in a reivew with no information to back it up?  Or should there be a few examples or mentions as to why? Or is being predictable someone else's idea of a relaxing story to while away the day?

Comments?  Counter Opinions?   I'd enjoy another perspective.