How not to respond to reviewers

The Author’s Big Mistake is responding defensively to criticism from reviewers (or worse, trying to sue them). But there’s another kind of mistake authors can make in this regard, and that’s reacting less than professionally when a reviewer declines to take a look at their books. It happened to me on a discussion board.

I mentioned that I’d once read and reviewed certain self- and vanity-published books, but hadn’t enjoyed most of them. In fact, I wasn’t even able to get through two of the books that were sent to me. So I decided not to review self-published books unless they were by an author I was familiar with or they had received fantastic professional reviews.

I didn’t think this decision was offensive, but here are some of the responses it got.

1. The guilt trip

“If you have a blanket policy against reading self-published books, you are not doing your job as a reviewer, and you are doing self-published authors a great wrong.”

The only job description of a reviewer is “Write as truthful as possible a review of whatever book you read”. It isn’t “read everything regardless of publisher”. And there are some review websites which will only look at self-published books – are those reviewers doing commercially published authors a great wrong?

There are far too many books out there for any one person to read them all, therefore most reviewers set standards. Some don’t read certain genres, some don’t want certain formats and so on, but it’s nothing personal against the authors.

2. The challenge

“I challenge you to try the first ten to twenty pages of any self-published book that someone recommends.”

I feel as though I’ve already taken this challenge once by reviewing some self-published books. And there are a lot of commercially published books I’d like to read, books which have been vetted by agents and/or editors. Shouldn’t I take the challenge with these books first?

Plus, I’ve visited many authors’ websites that didn’t provide excerpts (or didn’t subscribe to Amazon’s “Look Inside” feature). Even the author giving me the challenge mentioned that “I do have a page and a half on my authorhouse.com site...but only that, they don't allow the 20 page challenge”. What to do under those circumstances?

Most of all, though, the only challenges I feel a need to respond to are the ones I set for myself.

3. The request for help

“Honest reviews help self-published authors improve.”

That depends on the author. If a writer went into self- or vanity-publishing, chances are they’re not accustomed to specific criticism of their work from agents or editors, and may not react well to that from reviewers. There are self-published writers who have editors and who accept critical feedback graciously, but I’ve also seen enough unpleasant reactions to make me cautious.

But even if every author behaved professionally under those circumstances, I could still not agree that reviewers are under an obligation to help any authors, no matter how they’re published. It’s nice if they do so, but it’s not the primary reason I read or review books.

4. The insult

“I guess broadening your horizons is not for you.”

Alas, this didn’t make me want to check out the writer’s book.

It’s best not to react this way when someone turns you down, even if you’re disappointed. I sometimes bend my policy for a polite and professional self-published author, but I have no reason to do so for an author who’s defensive or rude.

Author behaving badly

If responding defensively to a critical review is the Author's Big Mistake, responding while pretending to be someone else compounds that mistake by a factor of at least a hundred.

On Amazon, a reviewer called Caligirl08 wrote that she had read a Christopher Pike novel because it was set in her homeland of Turkey. Unfortunately she found several problems - the novel mentioned Istanbul as the capital city, called Turkey an Arabic country, placed a desert in Istanbul, etc. She gave the book a one-star review and said she was very disappointed.

Someone calling himself Michael Brite then responded, saying he was Christopher Pike's editor. I sat up a little straighter when I read that, because I couldn't imagine any editor intervening like that on an author's behalf, especially not to praise the author :

"Pike would be the first one to accept blame for any mistakes in his book... Pike deliberately made Sara realistic... Pike embraces fans of all types, especially the crazy ones."

That wasn't even getting into his claims that there were good reasons for the problems the reviewer pointed out (e.g. readers preferred a non-Turkish name for the Turkish hero). He concluded by asking, "If you found the Secret of Ka so offensive, why did you read it?"

Perhaps because the reviewer isn't precognitive and therefore doesn't know she'll dislike something before she actually reads it?

But then it came out. "Michael Brite" is actually Christopher Pike.

This is Pike,
This is the real Christopher Pike, ignore the name this response appears under. I use many names online.

I was wondering why an author would need to "use many names online". I use two - Marian Perera and "Queen of Swords", and it's nearly always obvious that the two are one and the same person. But apparently "Michael Brite" gave several glowing five-star reviews to Pike's books, so perhaps that's why.

It reminds me of the time I came across a vanity-printed novel that had well over a hundred reviews posted in a short space of time, which was surprising because of the book's lack of distribution. But most of those were by anonymous posters who praised the book as an "epic" which combined "romance, action, adventure, fantasy, and tragedy". They also stressed that the book should be made into a movie. I read through the entire collection and still don't know what the story is actually about.

But at least that author may have felt there was no other choice - the vanity press wasn't going to send her book to any reviewers, professional or otherwise. Christopher Pike had no such excuse for his sockpuppet(s).

Review Revenge...

...and other tales from the literary dark side.

Every time you think you’ve seen the ultimate in review abuse, something new comes along.

First I was amused by this article, which describes how a publicist dealt with the problem of a reviewer being too busy to read her client’s book. She sent some “mock reviews” that could be used instead. Two of those were “Great page-turner” and “Couldn’t put it down”.

Well, of course the reviewer would love her client’s book. And would express said love in the most tired and generic terms. Unfortunately the story had a less happy ending. As the reviewer described it,

So I turned back to her list of blurbs, which I had printed out. Unfortunately, they fell to the floor and were all mixed up. I tried to reconstruct them, but they got a bit garbled…

Here’s my best shot: “Don’t even think of page-turning anticipation!” ”Kept me up down.” “Filled with NY Times!” “Couldn’t put it near the water!”

Publicists should feel free to use them as needed.

That was funny, but the case of Robert Stanek is less so. Apparently he’s a self-published author who posted several hundred five-star reviews of his books on Amazon (and one-star reviews for some other writers).

Then a newsletter which mentioned Stanek received a vaguely threatening email from a lawyer claiming to represent him. Said lawyer sent it from a Hotmail account, “as used by the best attorneys” -- link. When a writer describes this as a “one-man PublishAmerica”, I don’t think it’s an exaggeration.

Mr Stanek’s view of the critics is:

Clearly the originators, and perpetuators, of all this nonsense are enormous fans of George RR Martin… In prison, people like them usually get shanked.

That’s just disturbing, so let’s move on to the last and latest in the tales of review revenge. This hit the news today (and inspired my post).

A Cambridge-based academic found a scathing online response to her book on Russian culture, an Amazon review calling it “the sort of book that makes you wonder why it was ever published". The reviewer, who took the handle Historian, also trashed other books, including two by a professor at Oxford University.

In contrast, Historian loved a book by another professor, Orlando Figes, and expressed disappointment that he hadn't won a certain prize. The book which had won was "not nearly as good as its many plaudits in the press and book prize judges think."

According to Historian, anyway.

But the problem with picking on academics is that they’re really fond of doing research and putting the pieces together. Soon emails filled with formal fury circulated and the lawyers were summoned. Then the news broke.

The butler professor’s wife did it. And apparently she’s “a senior law lecturer at Cambridge University, barrister, and member of the top human rights specialists” -- link. How could someone so educated not realize that whoever was behind the reviews would be found out, discredited and maybe laughed at into the bargain?

Never a dull moment in publishing, that’s for sure.

Online reviewers

I like to browse writers’ discussion boards. On one of these recently, I saw a topic where a new writer (printed through a vanity press) mentioned she had received a “Professional Review”. Capital letters and all. I was curious and checked this out, wondering if it was perhaps Kirkus Discoveries.

Unfortunately it wasn’t. That made me decide to write a little about some online reviewers who may provide praise for free but who are unlikely to do much else.

1. Ghostwriter Literary Reviews

Ghostwriter Literary Reviews has a webpage with a dark background that makes it difficult to read reviews, some of which are in a small pale font. There also flashy pixels that continually stream across the screen and are distracting. Their mission statement also doesn’t contribute to a professional appearance.

GhostWriters Literary Reviews, is mostly a group authors who are committed to helping other authors, others are avid readers who enjoy a good book, and though some may have literary credentials, most of us are just trying to help the less seasoned authors.

What’s odd is that they offer paid editing services. I wouldn’t pay anyone who constructed sentences such as the above.

We have criteria for book ratings, and very often will explain the problems found in the read to the author- before posting it. Some may not find this fair to potential buyers; however, if the review is not posted on our site, we can not recommend it.

What’s the difference between a review that is not posted on the website because Ghostwriter Literary Reviews cannot recommend it, and a review that is not posted on the website because no one has read the book (or has read it but not written a review)? How can readers tell the difference?

Anyway, a review site that refrains from posting negative reviews is not serving the needs of readers – at best. At worst, it’s an ego-stroking site for authors. And the vast majority of reviews on this site are four- and five-star reads which tend to be short and are unlikely to do the books justice.

2. Allbooks Review International

Allbooks Review International (is it just me or are the names of these sites a bit on the long and flowery side?) has a website that wasn’t easy to navigate when I was trying to get to the reviews. And in their “Review Showcase”, Fiction is a separate category from Mystery.

I’m also a bit leery of any review site which declares that it is “helping Authors” or calls itself a “your professional review and author promo source” – professional by whose standards?

On the plus side, though, these reviews do include the publisher’s name and cost of the book, which is more than the Ghostwriter reviews do. But I read a few reviews on each site to see how well they were written, and here's what Allbooks had to say about A Crucible of Innocence.

The author, Mr. Forsythe, has used his poetic gifts to create a special experience here. Reading this book is not something that can be done in an evening or on a weekend. It must be done with no timeframe of completion in mind.

So it’s the poetry version of The Never Ending Story?

It is written in a style where time must be taken for re-reading, contemplating, and savoring. Only a poet can do this.

Not the best way to attract readers who aren’t poets.

This book is recommended to any reader who wants for something more in a book. It is definitely not ‘popular’ fiction. It is not a ‘good read.’ It does make for great and worthwhile reading and that is what this reviewer seeks.

It’s possible that this book is highbrow and rarefied to the point where regular readers like me can’t understand it (the review also describes the genre as “poetic fiction”, whatever that is).

3. Million Dollar Books Reviews

I couldn’t even find a webpage for this one, so I looked them up on Amazon, where they have a profile and award books either four or five diamonds : <> <> <> <> <>

All the reviews except one are by Leandus Poe, described as “CEO/Author/Critic”. A couple of the reviews start out with gushing tributes from the reviewer about how wonderful it was to meet the author on MySpace, where the author went to college or about how fantastic a person they are. One ends with the prophesy that the author “is destine to make her mark on the world if she continues to write with this quality!”

After reading comments like “I could actually sense the emotion as being a true emotion and not a made up emotion”, I wouldn’t recommend this reviewer.

There are online reviewers who offer honest and meaningful reviews (All About Romance, SF Book Review, etc); there are others who offer empty flattery. And readers can tell the difference.

How not to respond to criticism

Let’s say you’ve written a novella and are offering it as a free read on your website, along with a comment form. Someone – not me, by the way – comments that the novella reads like an unedited first draft, and points out an especially egregious typo. What is a professional and gracious response to this?

___ Thank you. I’ll be sure to correct the typo.

___ Well, you can’t please everyone.

___ That’s funny. Another person who commented on that typo offered a different way to spell that word.

___ My story has received five-star ratings twelve times. Still, negative comments are always hurtful when they come from other authors.

___ This is a comment I recently received : “i cant waitu ntil i read the next one!!” So you see, criticism from competing authors doesn’t mean as much as praise from avid readers.

___ I’m not trying to sell these stories unless a publisher asks me for them. They are a pleasure to write. And they’re free!

The writer showed me the original feedback, which was critical but polite and honest, since the novella really does need work. Her response included the last five points in my checklist – the praise from the avid reader is a direct quote.

I don’t know if the critiquer will ever read this writer’s work again, but I’m certain I won’t. The passive-aggressive reaction may be less dramatic than the Hoffman/Rice-type meltdown, but they're both unacceptable.

How should writers respond to reviews?

Alice Hoffman’s recent, uh, response to a review made me think about writers and negative reviews, and there’s a question I’d like to ask anyone reading this.

We all know that the best response to a review is “Thank you”. Reacting to a negative review by becoming angry or defensive – or worse, trying to enlist fans or fellow authors against the reviewer – won’t change the fact that the reviewer didn’t like the book. It won’t produce good reviews to counteract the negative one. It’ll just establish the author as someone who behaves in a less than professional manner, someone who can’t take the heat.

But what’s the best response if a reviewer misunderstood something factual in the book, or made an error? As a very crude example, let’s say that your character does a firewalk, pacing barefoot over a layer of hot coals. A review says that this couldn’t happen without your character’s feet being burned.

In reality, though, people can do this and escape serious injury because the coals are covered by a thin layer of ash that doesn’t conduct heat. As long as the people are walking briskly, it doesn’t hurt them.

So, would you respond and mention this, or include a link to the information?

On a concluding note, yesterday I reviewed a novel printed by the infamous PublishAmerica, and my review was pretty blunt about the problems that an actual publisher should have corrected. The author responded to thank me and let me know he found the review helpful. That’s a classy, professional response, and I hope his next book does very well.

Honest reviews

I read a post about the objectivity of reviews on How Publishing Really Works, and it raised a great point about why honest reviewers are unlikely to be paid by publishers or writers*. But it also made me think of the reviewers and review sites which don’t charge for reviews and yet which I wouldn’t trust.

For me, an important part of being a reviewer is complete honesty. Many unpublished manuscripts may be unreadable, but even published books line up on a bell curve. In other words, everything published isn’t going to be an automatic great read for anyone. And if it is, then the reviewer is either

1. not discriminating, in which case I’m unlikely to take their opinion into account when deciding to buy a book, or

2. operating for some purpose other than to tell readers whether a book is worth their time and money.

The reviewer might instead want to please authors, and what better way than to tell them how wonderful their books are? Or the reviewer may want a high rank on Amazon and one way to get that was to comment on as many books as possible. I say “was” because Amazon recently changed its ranking criteria and now goes by how helpful reviews are to readers, rather than how many reviews are posted.

Discrimination, in the positive sense of the word, also matters a great deal. I checked out Ghostwriter Literary Reviews, which claims to offer “An unbiased evaluation of your work”, and I read all the posted reviews for November – ten reviews in all. Without exception, these were four- and five-star reads that the reviewers loved.

On the other hand, the grades for the books reviewed on All About Romance for November range from A to D-, and many of the reviews are Bs or Cs. Just like a real bell curve, and I know which site I’m more likely to trust. There’s not much value in a gold medal which is given out to everyone who competes.

For me, this is what helpful reviews do or don’t do.

Don’t

• Repeat the blurb on the back of the book and tack on a few sentences at the end to say what a good read it was

• Veer into hyperbole or excessive praise, e.g. ”…is sure to be an instant classic that will be read for generations to come.” – Children’s Literary Reviews

• Focus attention on the reviewer rather than the book (“The descriptions of life in Bellefleur-sur-Seine reminded me of my own childhood in France, though I didn’t find the farmer’s motivation believable when he blew up his own barn. My Oncle Rene was in the same situation with the local gendarmes…”)

• Contain errors. A typo or two is unlikely to matter, but several mistakes in spelling, punctuation, wording or sentence construction can make a review appear amateurish, unintentionally funny or both. Ghostwriter Literary Reviews provides an example : “Belle's father, Master Francois St. Clair wanted his unborn adolescent to become part beneficiary to one of the richest sugarcane Plantations… Her Master and Mistress in apprehension of demise; gave her no alternative.”

Do

• Say what the book’s genre is. I’ve read dozens of amateur reviews which don’t even provide this basic information.

• Say who the main characters are and give an idea of the plot. I’ve also read reviews which were so vague they could have been applied to any book.

• Warn readers if there’s something they should know in advance, without (as far the reviewer is capable) giving away spoilers. If I were writing a review of A Game of Thrones, I would make it clear that this was the first in a series and that the series is nowhere near complete. I would also caution them that this isn’t a book with happy endings for everyone.

• Comment fairly and critically rather than focusing only on praise or only on what doesn’t work.

• Show familiarity with the author’s body of work, the genre or at least books in general. I read a review which noted that the main characters of a book had chapters from their different points of view, and this was “a most clever and unique way to tell a story in my opinion”.

There are many sites and reviewers out there which are honest about the books they read, even if they risk backlashes from authors or fans by doing so. Those are the sites and reviewers I take into account when deciding which books to read and buy.

*Examples of paid reviews include: Authors on the Rise Book Reviews and Children’s Literary Reviews (for anything over 18 pages). Ghostwriter Literary Reviews previously offered a paid fast-track service, and now offers other paid services such as an "Author Spotlight".

Critical feedback and professionalism

When an author asks for feedback, or publishes a book, what is a professional response if the reviews or the feedback criticize the work?

To me, these are unprofessional responses:

1. “Lots of other people liked my work.”

If something didn’t work for a reviewer or critiquer, it didn’t work for them. If they felt a character was unsympathetic, telling them that ten other people loved the character is unlikely to make them agree and decide that they love the character too. Mothers usually express this in terms of what their children would do if all the other kids jumped off the bridge.

The exception to this is when the ten other people are agents or editors, meaning their professional opinion carries a lot of weight.

2. “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.”

This shows a misunderstanding of the purpose of reviews or feedback. Reviews are not intended to make the author feel good – they are intended to give potential readers an idea of whether the book (or film, or product) is worth spending money on.

Likewise, feedback (except when it’s from one’s family) is not meant to make the author feel on top of the world. It’s meant to give the author an honest assessment of his or her work. There’s nothing wrong in wanting to hear only good things about one’s work, but it’s best if such an author is careful when asking for feedback. Rather than saying, “Please read this and tell me what you think”, the author should specify, “Please read this and tell me what you think as long as you don’t say anything negative”.

At least that way, people who provide honest feedback will be warned in advance.

3. “You only said something negative because you don’t like me/don’t like my genre/don’t like my publisher.”

These are a form of the Ad Hominem fallacy – rather than focusing on the quality of the feedback, the response attacks the motives of the person who gives the feedback. It often comes from writers who don’t want to think that there might be problems with their work. If they can somehow turn the review or feedback into a personal attack, then it’s no longer about their work – it’s about some other issue.

The most professional response to critical feedback is to thank the person who took the time to read and respond to the work. If it’s a review, the book obviously cannot be changed, but if it’s still a work-in-progress, writers can often benefit from hearing about what doesn’t work for other people.

It doesn’t feel good to hear that there are problems in one’s work, but there are a lot of things in life that don’t feel good and yet are necessary. And responding in an unprofessional way is a good way to not just lose readers but to halt one’s own growth as a writer (for an example of a major author doing this, google “Anne Rice” and “meltdown”).

I recently read a blog where the author linked to an excerpt from a book and asked readers to tell her what they thought. When I did - briefly and tactfully - she said she felt "disappointment, hurt, sorrow, anger". Reacting professionally to feedback is a skill almost as important as writing, and writers who don’t have it would do well to learn it.