I’ve only heard a little about what happened, but I really think the issue is the immediacy of internet posting and that when one is upset, one needs to think before clicking the “submit” button.

I know I’ve probably written and then deleted at least as many posts as I’ve actually posted on the various blogs, forums and other sites I follow. Not that I haven’t been contrary or critical or posted something that I wrote in a state of advanced pissed-offedness. But I’ve thought about rather I really wanted to post what I’ve written before before I clicked.

The other thing is, when I do get ticked at something or someone on the ‘net, I try to spout about the idea, not the person who posted it. In other words, I might call an idea stupid, but I try to avoid calling people stupid…even when I’m fairly sure they are. Has to do with not fancying be called stupid myself. Although I’m not a practicing anything, religiously speaking, I find that the Golden Rule (stop it…I mean “Do unto others…”, not “He who has the gold…”) is really a pretty good idea.

So, maybe Alice Hoffman should have simply stopped before she posted and thought about whether she would want someone to post her phone number or other personal information on the net, and then acted accordingly.

I can only think of one time that reading a review made me go out and search for a book. No, make that two, but one was a non-fiction book.

And, I’ve never, ever not read a book because I read a bad review of it.

So, Cele, if you’re out there on the far fringe, you’ve got company – me.

Oh, and Natalie…I’m with you on the Poisonwood Bible review. I read that as part of a geography class I took a few years ago (and loved it), and whatever that reviewer read certainly wasn’t the book I read.

Moreover, reviews are not necessarily fair evaluations of a book, nor are they intended to be, because each reviewer is a writer himself, with his own readership. And his first job is to cater to that readership, not to give your book a fair reading. He might review your book without even reading it, if he can cater to his readership by doing so. He might even attack you personally, without even reading your book, if it caters to his audience. (It happened to me.)

The corollary is that a negative review does not necessarily reflect the quality of the book itself. I also have read many negative reviews of books that I loved, books that excited me, inspired me, motivated me, books that kept me glued to the page and wouldn’t let me go and finally left me feeling acutely sad because it was over. The reviewers disagreed with me. So what? When it comes to what I want to read, I was right, and they were wrong.

While authors may have the right and the power to respond to reviewers, it rarely accomplishes anything useful, because it almost always makes you look bitter and petty. So authors should either (1) refuse to respond to negative reviews, except maybe to simply link to them from your website, or (2) ignore reviews completely, because you can’t let reviewers tell you what to think of your book. Authors should also decouple their feelings about a particular review—”That reviewer is completely wrong and unfair”—with their feelings about their book and themselves—”My writing sucks.”

-TimK

Although our books are parts of our selves, we have to remember that opinions are of the books, not us.

now, rip on my family? I’ll rip you two new assholes.