Sharon, I really do like you an enormous amount, which is why I think I need to say that if you're going to publish the scathing bile-filled reviews, it kind of smack of hypocrisy to try to soften them to the writer later.
And I think you're above that and I respect your integrity, and if you realized how it looked, you wouldn't do it, but it's your inner nice getting away with you.
And that was a scathing, bile-filled review. I'm just saying. Worse than the one she gave me for Hammered, which stands as the single worst professional review I've ever been on the receiving end of.
Anyway, not defending Sarah's book, mind you (because reviews are about honest opinions, even though I think Romie tends to review the books she wants to be reading rather than the book in front of her (I'm kind of startled she liked Scardown as much as she did. Still blinking.) and that she's... well, she tends to try to force things read shallowly into patterns whether they fit or not) but just kind of pointing out that maybe if you're uncomfortable with the intensity with which Romie reacts, the appropriate time to express that is before the reviews are published.
Which is not to say that I'm complaining about her reviews of me, or Sarah, or anybody else, because I'm not. Your magazine, her opinion, and so on, and I'm always pleased when somebody puts the time and effort into a mention of my work, even when the mention stings.
But soft-peddling and trying to soften it later doesn't do *you* any good.
And I've told Romie to her face (or her email, anyway) that I think her reviews are scathing, so I don't feel bad saying it here.
It probably was unfair of me to post in reply to Truepenny, but I wanted her to know I thought positive things, as well.
And I think you're above that and I respect your integrity, and if you realized how it looked, you wouldn't do it, but it's your inner nice getting away with you.
but I wanted her to know I thought positive things, as well.
The problem is, you're on public record over at the RE journal as saying you agree with Romie's review. You can't have it both ways, alas.
And what you're saying above is not "I liked these things about the books," but "Romie didn't hate the book as much as you think," which is the same thing she said to me about the Hammered review.
Both reviews come across as "I (Romie) hated the book."
It'd be different if you were to point out some things that *you* liked, or thought, or were moved to wonder, or even disliked. If you see what I mean?
Anyway, *I* am not upset with you or Romie. I just kind of needed to express that.
I do agree with most of her article - it's just that I felt she expressed positive in there as well, and I wanted to emphasize that. Alas, both efforts came across badly (You can't have it both ways, alas.)
Anyway, *I* am not upset with you or Romie. I just kind of needed to express that.
And I should add here that I'm not upset with anybody at all.
Yes, it's a painful review. But I'm the one who chose to submit the book to publishers. I'm the one who accepted the money when they said they wanted to publish it. I have to take my knocks.
But, likewise, you made a decision as an editor to run that review as it stood. If the consequence is that I'm upset, then that's my tough luck. I really do appreciate your desire to make me feel better, but honestly in this situation that's not your job. You can't wear the editor hat and the friend hat at the same time, and I neither expect nor want you to.
My copy arrived this very morning, but as I've just started another book, I don't think I'll get to it until after WorldCon. (Besides I'm not lugging a hardback all the way to Glasgow on the train. *g*)
But I just thought I'd mention that the review didn't put me off at all. If anything, it's piqued my curiosity.
My copy arrived last week, but I'm holding off reading it, because I suspect I'll tear right through it. And this looks like the kind of book I want to savor.
I also suspect this book is right up my particular very picky alley, which is why I forked out for it in the first place. If it's not, I'll let you know. :)
FWIW, I ordered your book back in February and I'm chewing my fingernails waiting for it to get here. I never order books or buy books based on reviews. I buy most of my books based on what smart people I know say about them. After listening to Kat and Bear sing the praises of this book, there was no way I wasn't going to buy it.
So take heart. For every one person who makes a decision about buying a book based on reviews, I'm fairly confident there are ten more of us out there who use other criteria.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
truepenny
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 02:34 pm (UTC)I think she read some other book.
Pfui.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 02:35 pm (UTC)I'm sorry it came across that way - she actually really loved Mildmay, and really looks forward to your next book.
*hugs*
We still both think you're incredibly talented.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 02:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 02:46 pm (UTC)And she does think you've "...a fascinating original world, and brilliant street slang."
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:24 pm (UTC)And I think you're above that and I respect your integrity, and if you realized how it looked, you wouldn't do it, but it's your inner nice getting away with you.
And that was a scathing, bile-filled review. I'm just saying. Worse than the one she gave me for Hammered, which stands as the single worst professional review I've ever been on the receiving end of.
Anyway, not defending Sarah's book, mind you (because reviews are about honest opinions, even though I think Romie tends to review the books she wants to be reading rather than the book in front of her (I'm kind of startled she liked Scardown as much as she did. Still blinking.) and that she's... well, she tends to try to force things read shallowly into patterns whether they fit or not) but just kind of pointing out that maybe if you're uncomfortable with the intensity with which Romie reacts, the appropriate time to express that is before the reviews are published.
Which is not to say that I'm complaining about her reviews of me, or Sarah, or anybody else, because I'm not. Your magazine, her opinion, and so on, and I'm always pleased when somebody puts the time and effort into a mention of my work, even when the mention stings.
But soft-peddling and trying to soften it later doesn't do *you* any good.
And I've told Romie to her face (or her email, anyway) that I think her reviews are scathing, so I don't feel bad saying it here.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:29 pm (UTC)Ok. Thanks for letting me know.
It probably was unfair of me to post in reply to Truepenny, but I wanted her to know I thought positive things, as well.
And I think you're above that and I respect your integrity, and if you realized how it looked, you wouldn't do it, but it's your inner nice getting away with you.
I'll think on that.
Thanks for your honest response.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:34 pm (UTC)but I wanted her to know I thought positive things, as well.
The problem is, you're on public record over at the RE journal as saying you agree with Romie's review. You can't have it both ways, alas.
And what you're saying above is not "I liked these things about the books," but "Romie didn't hate the book as much as you think," which is the same thing she said to me about the Hammered review.
Both reviews come across as "I (Romie) hated the book."
It'd be different if you were to point out some things that *you* liked, or thought, or were moved to wonder, or even disliked. If you see what I mean?
Anyway, *I* am not upset with you or Romie. I just kind of needed to express that.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:36 pm (UTC)Damn no tea yet.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:40 pm (UTC)Anyway, *I* am not upset with you or Romie. I just kind of needed to express that.
Understood, and much appreciated.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:50 pm (UTC)Yes, it's a painful review. But I'm the one who chose to submit the book to publishers. I'm the one who accepted the money when they said they wanted to publish it. I have to take my knocks.
But, likewise, you made a decision as an editor to run that review as it stood. If the consequence is that I'm upset, then that's my tough luck. I really do appreciate your desire to make me feel better, but honestly in this situation that's not your job. You can't wear the editor hat and the friend hat at the same time, and I neither expect nor want you to.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:56 pm (UTC)Very true. Although sometimes, like Dobby, I try.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 04:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:37 pm (UTC)I just didn't want to stress you further.
shall now leave you alone, with an apologetic *hug*
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:35 pm (UTC)*hug*
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 02:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:53 pm (UTC)But I just thought I'd mention that the review didn't put me off at all. If anything, it's piqued my curiosity.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 03:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 04:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 04:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 04:23 pm (UTC)I also suspect this book is right up my particular very picky alley, which is why I forked out for it in the first place. If it's not, I'll let you know. :)
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 04:38 pm (UTC)Re: five stars out of five
Date: 2005-08-01 04:47 pm (UTC)And I, too, use Harriet as a verb.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-01 05:38 pm (UTC)So take heart. For every one person who makes a decision about buying a book based on reviews, I'm fairly confident there are ten more of us out there who use other criteria.