Only 6 here, but quite funny (well, not for the authors I suppose).
I think the worst has to be the review of Foer: "Foer isn't just a bad author, he's a vile one."
Yikes! Can an author's writing really be vile?
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.
Meanest Reviews
-
michellemoran
- Bibliophile
- Posts: 1186
- Joined: August 2008
- Contact:
I did not think an author's writing could be vile.
I try not to be mean with my reviews. However, I do try to explain why I didn't like it.
I try not to be mean with my reviews. However, I do try to explain why I didn't like it.
News, views, and reviews on books and graphic novels for young adult.
http://yabookmarks.blogspot.com/
http://yabookmarks.blogspot.com/
For those who haven't read the review of James Thackara's The Book of Kings from the Observer, it's a classic...
See the whole thing for the full effect. I tend to be sent 700+ page books for review, and all I can say is I'm glad I didn't have to cover this one.And it's terrible. Startlingly badly written, with no apparent understanding of what drives people or how people relate or talk to each other, it is a book of gigantic, hopeless awfulness. You read it to a constant, internal muttering of 'Oh - God - Thackara - please, don't - no - oh, God, just listen to this rubbish'. It's so awful, it's not even funny. There is not one decent sentence in the book, nothing but falsity and a useless sincerity. It may be the very worst novel I have ever read.
-
michellemoran
- Bibliophile
- Posts: 1186
- Joined: August 2008
- Contact:
-
LoveHistory
- Bibliomaniac
- Posts: 3751
- Joined: September 2008
- Location: Wisconsin, USA
- Contact:
[quote=""michellemoran""] 
Wow, kind of makes me want to read the book just to see what would inspire such passionate internal mutterings...![/quote]
Now, granted that I'm one with a reputation for not pulling punches, but there really are times when a book really deserves it. Like that awful Heir Apparent book. Mind you, if it hadn't been for Michele and I scathing it, we might never have had the Misadventures of Miss Moppet, so some good came out of it
PS, I never told anyone but I did receive an email from Michele while she was reading that asking me if I was trying to kill her
Wow, kind of makes me want to read the book just to see what would inspire such passionate internal mutterings...![/quote]
Now, granted that I'm one with a reputation for not pulling punches, but there really are times when a book really deserves it. Like that awful Heir Apparent book. Mind you, if it hadn't been for Michele and I scathing it, we might never have had the Misadventures of Miss Moppet, so some good came out of it
PS, I never told anyone but I did receive an email from Michele while she was reading that asking me if I was trying to kill her
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
[quote=""Ariadne""]For those who haven't read the review of James Thackara's The Book of Kings from the Observer, it's a classic...
[/quote]
I can be quite scathing when reviewing a book I did not like. That is, I don't hold anything back, but I express myself as maturely and professionally as I can. I try to write it as though the author themself might read it; I don't want to bash the author, I want to give them honest and constructive criticism. I also try to write a review that I myself would want to read, and I won't read reviews where people simply trash the author or the book. Or if I do read them I come away with a worse opinion of the reviewer than of the book.
One thing I try to always do in reviews, especially ones where I am being predominantly critical, is cite specific examples of what I didn't like. That is what is missing from this review, at least from the excerpt posted here. I'm not interested in reading a review that just says "It was terrible! It was rubbish! Awful writing!" blah, blah blah Give me some examples!! If a reviewer can't/won't do that, then they lose all credibility with me.
[/quote]
I can be quite scathing when reviewing a book I did not like. That is, I don't hold anything back, but I express myself as maturely and professionally as I can. I try to write it as though the author themself might read it; I don't want to bash the author, I want to give them honest and constructive criticism. I also try to write a review that I myself would want to read, and I won't read reviews where people simply trash the author or the book. Or if I do read them I come away with a worse opinion of the reviewer than of the book.
One thing I try to always do in reviews, especially ones where I am being predominantly critical, is cite specific examples of what I didn't like. That is what is missing from this review, at least from the excerpt posted here. I'm not interested in reading a review that just says "It was terrible! It was rubbish! Awful writing!" blah, blah blah Give me some examples!! If a reviewer can't/won't do that, then they lose all credibility with me.
-
Margaret
- Bibliomaniac
- Posts: 2440
- Joined: August 2008
- Interest in HF: I can't answer this in 100 characters. Sorry.
- Favourite HF book: Checkmate, the final novel in the Lymond series
- Preferred HF: Literary novels. Late medieval and Renaissance.
- Location: Catskill, New York, USA
- Contact:
I absolutely do think a novel can be vile. However, one person's "vile" can easily be another person's "best I've read in years." I doubt Foer is losing sleep over this particular review. Or if he is, he shouldn't be!
Nasty slap at Grisham, though - it does seem unfair to side-swipe an author like that when you're not even reviewing one of his books!
Nasty slap at Grisham, though - it does seem unfair to side-swipe an author like that when you're not even reviewing one of his books!
Browse over 5000 historical novel listings (probably well over 5000 by now, but I haven't re-counted lately) and over 700 reviews at www.HistoricalNovels.info
-
M.M. Bennetts
Reviewing a book should mean it's about the book, rather than about the author. Though sometimes it can be difficult to separate the two, especially when talking about style.
Reviewing in the age of the internet has got much nastier though that it used to be. Because a newspaper reviewer always had the lawyers at least glancing over the copy to ensure that no one was going to get sued, whereas today, because there's so much reviewing by non-professionals and the internet is just such a huge beast, people will say just about anything and there's no hint of legal retribution.
There was that Orlando Figes incident on Amazon last spring where he went about dissing all the books of his professional rivals. He got caught and last I heard he was paying damages for loss of earnings and defamation of character.
Over the years, I've made what I hoped were honest comments and yes, I have sliced and diced a number of books. Okay, done root canal...Okay, perhaps I maybe a little ruined a career or two. But it always seemed to me that as a professional book critic my duty of care lay with the punter who was being asked to shell out their dosh and my job was to assess, Is this worth it? And why or why not?
But frankly a well-written and insightful review should tell the author where they got it hideously wrong.
About a million years ago, when rape was being dressed up as a good basis for romance in historical romances, I slashed a Victoria Holt novel, don't remember which one, (in a newspaper) for perpetuating this vile concept. And she never wrote another one of those. So that was a good thing.
Reviewing in the age of the internet has got much nastier though that it used to be. Because a newspaper reviewer always had the lawyers at least glancing over the copy to ensure that no one was going to get sued, whereas today, because there's so much reviewing by non-professionals and the internet is just such a huge beast, people will say just about anything and there's no hint of legal retribution.
There was that Orlando Figes incident on Amazon last spring where he went about dissing all the books of his professional rivals. He got caught and last I heard he was paying damages for loss of earnings and defamation of character.
Over the years, I've made what I hoped were honest comments and yes, I have sliced and diced a number of books. Okay, done root canal...Okay, perhaps I maybe a little ruined a career or two. But it always seemed to me that as a professional book critic my duty of care lay with the punter who was being asked to shell out their dosh and my job was to assess, Is this worth it? And why or why not?
But frankly a well-written and insightful review should tell the author where they got it hideously wrong.
About a million years ago, when rape was being dressed up as a good basis for romance in historical romances, I slashed a Victoria Holt novel, don't remember which one, (in a newspaper) for perpetuating this vile concept. And she never wrote another one of those. So that was a good thing.
Interesting, but Mark Twain's demolition of Fenimore Cooper (referenced in the Comments) has them all beat. And contains some excellent writing advice to boot.
http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/proje ... fense.html
Best line?
"There have been daring people in the world who claimed that Cooper could write English, but they are all dead now"
http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/proje ... fense.html
Best line?
"There have been daring people in the world who claimed that Cooper could write English, but they are all dead now"