I was guilty of responding to my review. But that was because the reviewer had mentioned another book that he wanted to read and ascribed it to me in error. I wanted to make sure that he and other readers would know the correct author. Oh, I also thanked him for taking the time to read the book and review it.
As to arguing, no. I don't think an author should do that.
Welcome to the Historical Fiction Online forums: a friendly place to discuss, review and discover historical fiction.
If this is your first visit, please be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You will have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing posts, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If this is your first visit, please be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You will have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing posts, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Should authors weigh in on public reviews?
- parthianbow
- Compulsive Reader
- Posts: 856
- Joined: April 2009
- Location: Nr. Bristol, SW England
- Contact:
[quote=""EC2""] To leave comments on reviews of one's work at Amazon or Goodreads whether the review is either positive or negative, is rather like breathing down the reader's neck. It's creepy and stalkerish. It also speaks of insecurity if it's a response to a negative. Sure, you might feel furious inside, or want to drive a particular overlooked or misunderstood point home, but you should have the control to process it and not to get your knickers in a knot. In the end it's not worth it, and you might actually learn something to help you further down the line.[/quote] (my bold emphasis)
Were you intending to lecture here, EC2? It certainly sounds as if you are.
In my opinion, in this world of multi media, multi social networking etc. etc., it's fair enough to respond to both positive and negative reviews, as long as it is done in a polite and civilised way. There are enough sock puppets and people out there who vote down reviews to fill a sports stadium, so an occasional comment here or there by an author (subject to what I said above) does no harm, IMHO. I guess that makes me creepy and stalkerish - in your opinion.
Were you intending to lecture here, EC2? It certainly sounds as if you are.
In my opinion, in this world of multi media, multi social networking etc. etc., it's fair enough to respond to both positive and negative reviews, as long as it is done in a polite and civilised way. There are enough sock puppets and people out there who vote down reviews to fill a sports stadium, so an occasional comment here or there by an author (subject to what I said above) does no harm, IMHO. I guess that makes me creepy and stalkerish - in your opinion.
Last edited by parthianbow on Tue February 7th, 2012, 4:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: addenda
Reason: addenda
Ben Kane
Bestselling author of Roman military fiction.
Spartacus - UK release 19 Jan. 2012. US release June 2012.
http://www.benkane.net
Twitter: @benkaneauthor
Bestselling author of Roman military fiction.
Spartacus - UK release 19 Jan. 2012. US release June 2012.
http://www.benkane.net
Twitter: @benkaneauthor
IMO with adverse reviews It just ups the ante for the trolls who get what they want and the whole thing often escalates into tears before bedtime. With good reviews, even a polite thank you can seem as if the author is just sitting there poised over the Amazon buttons, and yes it can feel very stalkerish to the readers. I've frequently seen comments to this effect on reader groups.
Perhaps purely readers would like to comment. Misfit?
But if this be your way of doing things, fair enough. Your choice, your opinion and a different viewpoint.
Perhaps purely readers would like to comment. Misfit?
But if this be your way of doing things, fair enough. Your choice, your opinion and a different viewpoint.
Les proz e les vassals
Souvent entre piez de chevals
Kar ja li coard nI chasront
'The Brave and the valiant
Are always to be found between the hooves of horses
For never will cowards fall down there.'
Histoire de Guillaume le Mareschal
www.elizabethchadwick.com
Souvent entre piez de chevals
Kar ja li coard nI chasront
'The Brave and the valiant
Are always to be found between the hooves of horses
For never will cowards fall down there.'
Histoire de Guillaume le Mareschal
www.elizabethchadwick.com
Just my personal feelings, but I'd rather not see author and/or author friend comments on Amazon/Goodreads reviews unless there's been a prior contact. I've seen a couple of instances where an author has been heavily gushy (and pretty damned quick with those gushes) on positive reviews, to the point that I felt intimidated not to post the more critical review I might have done so fearing a flame war or a negative voting campaign.Perhaps purely readers would like to comment. Misfit?
It really can make readers feel like the author is just sitting around watching reviews and even comments about books that it's better to stay away. I know I've mentioned this in other threads, but there was a book being discussed at Goodreads and the author just couldn't stay away from commenting. We felt horribly intimidated and ended up taking our discussion to a private group.
At home with a good book and the cat...
...is the only place I want to be
...is the only place I want to be
- Mythica
- Bibliophile
- Posts: 1095
- Joined: November 2010
- Preferred HF: European and American (mostly pre-20th century)
- Location: Colorado
- Contact:
[quote=""EC2""]IMO with adverse reviews It just ups the ante for the trolls who get what they want and the whole thing often escalates into tears before bedtime. With good reviews, even a polite thank you can seem as if the author is just sitting there poised over the Amazon buttons, and yes it can feel very stalkerish to the readers. I've frequently seen comments to this effect on reader groups.
Perhaps purely readers would like to comment. Misfit?
[/quote]
As another reader-only, I do agree with this. On Goodreads, I recently reviewed a book and gave it 4/5 stars. Soon after, the author "liked" my review and I noticed he also "liked" any other 4 or 5 star reviews. This just came across to me as slightly obsessive, as well as a subtle attempt at self promotion. When I write reviews, it's typically with other readers in mind, not the author. So knowing the author is logging in regularly and reading every review posted does feel kind of stalkerish. That's not to say author's shouldn't read reviews of their books, just that I find it awkward when they interact with them because that's not what they're for.
The internet truly does change everything. Readers aren't used to such level of interaction with authors. I was even hesitant to join this forum because I wasn't sure how I felt about regularly conversing with authors of the books I read.
Perhaps purely readers would like to comment. Misfit?
[/quote]
As another reader-only, I do agree with this. On Goodreads, I recently reviewed a book and gave it 4/5 stars. Soon after, the author "liked" my review and I noticed he also "liked" any other 4 or 5 star reviews. This just came across to me as slightly obsessive, as well as a subtle attempt at self promotion. When I write reviews, it's typically with other readers in mind, not the author. So knowing the author is logging in regularly and reading every review posted does feel kind of stalkerish. That's not to say author's shouldn't read reviews of their books, just that I find it awkward when they interact with them because that's not what they're for.
The internet truly does change everything. Readers aren't used to such level of interaction with authors. I was even hesitant to join this forum because I wasn't sure how I felt about regularly conversing with authors of the books I read.
Last edited by Mythica on Tue February 7th, 2012, 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[quote=""Mythica""]As another reader-only, I do agree with this. On Goodreads, I recently reviewed a book and gave it 4/5 stars. Soon after, the author "liked" my review and I noticed he also "liked" any other 4 or 5 star reviews. This just came across to me as slightly obsessive, as well as a subtle attempt at self promotion. When I write reviews, it's typically with other readers in mind, not the author. So knowing the author is logging in regularly and reading every review posted does feel kind of stalkerish. That's not to say author's shouldn't read reviews of their books, just that I find it awkward when they interact with them because that's not what they're for.
The internet truly does change everything. Readers aren't used to such level of interaction with authors. I was even hesitant to join this forum because I wasn't sure how I felt about regularly conversing with authors of the books I read.[/quote]
I believe there's some theory that the more certain reviews are *liked* at Goodreads the better chance that they are at the top of the pile. One of the recent YA kerfuffles there was partly over that issue - the author and her agent were chatting up the topic at Twitter (yes, a public twitter page) in doing just that because the #1 review of her book was a critical one and they wanted to up vote the four and five stars to knock the critical review off of the spotlight. I've seen similar tactics at Amazon, all the glowing reviews get the same number of positive votes as do the critical reviews get negative ones. They want them knocked down off of the main page.
The internet truly does change everything. Readers aren't used to such level of interaction with authors. I was even hesitant to join this forum because I wasn't sure how I felt about regularly conversing with authors of the books I read.[/quote]
I believe there's some theory that the more certain reviews are *liked* at Goodreads the better chance that they are at the top of the pile. One of the recent YA kerfuffles there was partly over that issue - the author and her agent were chatting up the topic at Twitter (yes, a public twitter page) in doing just that because the #1 review of her book was a critical one and they wanted to up vote the four and five stars to knock the critical review off of the spotlight. I've seen similar tactics at Amazon, all the glowing reviews get the same number of positive votes as do the critical reviews get negative ones. They want them knocked down off of the main page.
At home with a good book and the cat...
...is the only place I want to be
...is the only place I want to be
- Mythica
- Bibliophile
- Posts: 1095
- Joined: November 2010
- Preferred HF: European and American (mostly pre-20th century)
- Location: Colorado
- Contact:
[quote=""Misfit""]I believe there's some theory that the more certain reviews are *liked* at Goodreads the better chance that they are at the top of the pile. One of the recent YA kerfuffles there was partly over that issue - the author and her agent were chatting up the topic at Twitter (yes, a public twitter page) in doing just that because the #1 review of her book was a critical one and they wanted to up vote the four and five stars to knock the critical review off of the spotlight. I've seen similar tactics at Amazon, all the glowing reviews get the same number of positive votes as do the critical reviews get negative ones. They want them knocked down off of the main page.[/quote]
I don't know that Goodreads works like that though. This was the book I was referring to: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6645 ... conspiracy - for me, the first review listed does indeed have one "like" but scrolling down the page, there are other reviews with no "likes" coming before and inbetween more reviews with one or even more "likes". There seems to be no rhyme or reason as to what order reviews are listed in because it doesn't go by date either. At least, that's how it displays for me, is it the same for everyone else?
Maybe there needs to be a certain number of "likes" before it starts ordering them by that. None of the reviews from the above book seem to have a significant number of "likes".
Regardless, authors and agents conspiring to intentionally manipulate the order of reviews (whether it works or not) is definitely petty and obsessive - doing so in public is just stupid and unprofessional.
I don't know that Goodreads works like that though. This was the book I was referring to: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6645 ... conspiracy - for me, the first review listed does indeed have one "like" but scrolling down the page, there are other reviews with no "likes" coming before and inbetween more reviews with one or even more "likes". There seems to be no rhyme or reason as to what order reviews are listed in because it doesn't go by date either. At least, that's how it displays for me, is it the same for everyone else?
Maybe there needs to be a certain number of "likes" before it starts ordering them by that. None of the reviews from the above book seem to have a significant number of "likes".
Regardless, authors and agents conspiring to intentionally manipulate the order of reviews (whether it works or not) is definitely petty and obsessive - doing so in public is just stupid and unprofessional.
- sweetpotatoboy
- Bibliophile
- Posts: 1641
- Joined: August 2008
- Location: London, UK
As a reader, I think I generally agree that authors should keep out of review forums. These days, there are plenty of ways for an author to interact with his/her readers, which is great. If the forum or section is headed 'user reviews' or such-like, to me that means the author should not venture in. Oh yes, we know many authors will be having a good look. But once they start weighing in themselves, it starts getting uncomfortable - and personal (whether good or bad), rather than focused on honest and unbiased responses to the work in question.
I completely understand that there may be rare occasions when a blatantly erroneous message has been portrayed as fact and the author may, quite rightly, feel the need to right the wrong. This is the grey area - perhaps it would be best to ask a fan/reader to pipe up with a contrasting view to try and set the message straight.
I completely understand that there may be rare occasions when a blatantly erroneous message has been portrayed as fact and the author may, quite rightly, feel the need to right the wrong. This is the grey area - perhaps it would be best to ask a fan/reader to pipe up with a contrasting view to try and set the message straight.
[quote=""Ludmilla""]Hmm... more good reasons to give older books and dead authors their due attention perhaps?[/quote]
And there are plenty of them to go and discover.
And there are plenty of them to go and discover.
At home with a good book and the cat...
...is the only place I want to be
...is the only place I want to be