Criticism vs Snark
When I was in management, I was always careful to praise a subordinate in public but I never criticized anyone in public. Never. Maybe that’s why I’m so sensitive about the way people criticize others.
The other day I read a really vicious review posted at a “cough popular blog cough”. Okay, so maybe the book wasn’t any good, but it was good enough to give the writer of the snark review a couple of funny hours. What bothered me was the fact that hundreds of people commented on the review. I didn’t read all the comments, but no one seemed to give a rat’s derriere about the fact that there was a person sitting behind the keyboard.
I think you can really let a book have it without taking the author with it. How about saying, “I read this awful book last night…let me list a few things I thought were wrong with it,” without the snark?
Now, to all those people who will pop up with the following question: Does that mean you think authors are exempt from criticism? Criticism is fine. Cruelty isn’t. There’s a huge difference and most people know where the line is.
One more time. There’s a person sitting behind the keyboard.
James Moran had a great comment on his blog about criticism, and one with which I completely agree:
“Talk about the *work*, all you want. But lay off the person behind the work. Because I’m simply trying to tell you good stories. In the end, that is all I can do.”
What I read on that blog wasn’t ridicule. It went beyond that. It was vicious. Yet there were plenty of people ready to pile on with “Yeah, baby, you got it right, that’s awful.” Giggle, giggle.
Anyone else see the irony here?
Just exactly who was, well, awful?
I have to agree wholehearted. I read lots of popular blogs but I find that I seldom comment. Some times the bullying is a bit much. I haven’t posted a review in a while but when I have a bad review I tend to think real hard about what I want to say. I think, if the author was standing in front of me, would I say this to her/his face?
I just had a similar experience. I read a book by a popular author and hated it, just hated it. The first time I’ve ever had that feeling reading her books. But writing the review made me think about why I hated it without resorting to name calling or abuse shorthand. You know, those comments such as, “What could she have been thinking?” that says nothing but manages to convey contempt.
At the risk of going off on a rant, why do some websites and some blogs think they speak for the romance community? I’ve been writing seriously since 1991 and published since 1995 and I’d never think to claim myself as the end-all, be-all of anything, let alone such a diverse group of readers. I resent it, frankly, and see red when such sites pillory an author.
All of us – regardless of where we are in the stage of our writing careers – try to write the best book we can. We’re not trying to cheat a reader. Instead, we’re trying to connect with the reader. Sometimes, we miss the mark. But for some of those sites to manufacture an adversarial relationship between writer and reader is personally distasteful to me.
Okay, rant over.
I think that there are some blogs/websites that thrive on posting snarky reviews. I’ve been reviewing for awhile now and I would never write something that I wouldn’t be able to say right in front of the author. A good reviewer needs to review the book but needs to do it with a sense of professionalism.
I’ve wondered what the hidden agenda is for some of those blogs and websites. Just like I think you can tell who a writer is – deep down – if you read enough of her work, I think you can tell who a blogger is after awhile.
I’m at heart a non-confrontational person. I have to feel very, very strongly about something to go nose-to-nose with someone. I don’t think I could ever personally tell an author that I thought her prose sucked but I could find a way to convey it in a review. Or at least I hope I could.
To be fair, sometimes a snarky review that doesn’t attack the author can devolve into one not because of the blog author but because of the comments in that particular blog entry. The nature of the blogs is that, if you are snarky, the commentators are encouraged to be just as snarky as you or, in an environment like a blog, become even more snarky than the previous comment. But it is too easy to cross the line and become cruel instead. This is why a negative review on a popular blog can devolve into a free-for-all tar-and-feather session.
This is why I’d never allow comments on my reviews, personally. It’s too easy for the comment sections in such reviews to turn ugly.
On the other hand, James Moran should know what he is getting into when he puts himself out on the Web with his blog. Too many Torchwood fans are CRAZY, especially when they do not get the storyline they want. I’m not surprised he’s getting some crazy responses.
I think you’re right on all three points. Torchwood fans are slightly rabid, not to allow comments on your reviews is probably wise, and comments can devolve.
However, the latter point raises a question: do some blogs encourage wolves? I think a blog owner can direct the conversation or steer the tenor of discourse. When they either don’t direct it, or seem to dangle the meat in front of the wolves, it arouses my curiosity as to why.
Speaking from my experience, even if the blog owner does not intend to be deliberately inflammatory, it is not easy to steer conversations in a blog back to the right track once it has been derailed. It is a tiring task, especially if the blog is highly trafficked and you have easily 10 new comments every hour while the blog topic is hot. If you look at Dear Author, there are some comment threads that have become way too derailed to the point that some of those people who derailed the discussion actually ignored Jane’s repeated warnings and admonishments to get back on track.
I suspect most blog owners just give up, ignore a comment thread that has become too much to handle, and hope that the topic in question will just die out eventually.
This is the nature of immediate interactive outlets like blogs and Twitters and what not. There are plenty of good as well as the ugly that come along with these fancy gizmos.
It’s like the difference in humor and a joke.
Humor is an attempt to make light the impossible situation we humans find ourselves in, with the hope it might make someone’s burden lighter. A joke is something to make fun of someone just to get a laugh.
Constructive criticism helps us grow stronger. Mean spirited aims to to tear people down and is only a weak effort to elevate our own status.
I’d rather be unknown than known for hurting people.
Dr. B
Well, this reply is only a week late – I do apologize for missing your comment.
I really do think that most blog owners can regulate responses. If people get off track, moderate the comments. Block some posters. Otherwise, it’s a little like handing a gas tank to a pyromaniac and then acting surprised when he torches City Hall. Oops, not my fault. Please.