| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Yulie
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 1045
Location: Elsewhere
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 9:56 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I find all these accusations of unnamed parties in the romance community acting as bullies and mean girls very interesting. Once upon a time, when romance reviews were almost always positive, AAR went against the accepted conventions with reviews that were honest and sometimes very negative. Back then, it was AAR and its reviewers that were accused of being mean and unfairly targeting authors. I'm glad that Laurie and the staff paid no attention; that took guts. Thanks to the hard work of AAR and others, it's now obvious to most readers that reviews should cover the full spectrum of reactions. So what is this new form of "viscous", "finger pointing", "shaming" behavior? Is it posting examples of plagiarism? Is it calling out authors who behave badly online? Is it arguing that some books appear to be poorly researched? Or maybe discussions of copyright issues are not good form? All these things are valuable to me as a reader when I try to decide what to spend my limited book budget on, and even if they are not as useful to other readers, I fail to see why they are inappropriate in any way. Most people will encounter criticism in their personal and professional lives. This criticism may not be perceived as fair, but it does not mean the person expressing it is wrong, or bullying, or whatever word you want to use.
Authors who want to complain about reviews can do so to their significant others, their friends, their kids, their critique partners, their author pals, their dogs - but don't show up in the middle of a reader discussion to say you're being oppressed. Don't make a public spectacle of it. And don't ever send your fans to do that sort of dirty work for you. If an author does any of those things, the likelihood of my ever buying said author's books will drop into the slim to none zone.
Finally, I participate in forums that have nothing to do with romance novels, and my experience has been that the romance community is much less judgmental and is generally friendlier than communities devoted to other interests. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Linda in sw va
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 4707
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yulie wrote: | | I find all these accusations of unnamed parties in the romance community acting as bullies and mean girls very interesting. . |
Yulie, I don't think anyone is pointing to reviews that are critical, especially here at AAR. AAR has always done a fantastic job with reviews and no one is looking at 'Harriet Klausner' as a model of reviewing.
But since you asked about 'mean girls' and vicious behavior, in the 50s Shade thread I was given this link to a blog on live journal that just blew me away in it's nastiness.
http://gentleblaze.livejournal.com/514.html
This is nothing but a smear campaign under the guise of trying to get the 'truth' out there so people know what E.L. James is really like. Chat logs saved, quotes taken out of context, etc. Whether any of it is actually true or not does the author of this blog not realize that she is making herself look equally rotten in the process? It takes me back to high school where someone starts with - "I think you should know the truth about Jessica" or some such and then proceeds to tell you all the rotten things she's said or did, because you know she really felt you should know.  In our time of online communities the ability to put that out there and have others jump on the bandwagon can be scary.
I think it's fine to say that you didn't feel an author acted ethically but there is a line that can get crossed when it comes to personal attacks. In this case I didn't feel the blogger (fellow fan fiction author) was merely trying to state her own opinion about the ethics of publishing that piece of work, about but to influence others as well, giving them information cherry picked to support her own agenda. Whatever quotes she saved or 'paraphrased' to show this author in a negative light.
And to take this back to the original post in this thread, yes it did effect how I saw the author, I was going to give one of her fan fiction works a try but that was such a turn-off I want nothing to do with anything else she's written, though she may be brilliant that's what will stick in my mind.
Linda
_________________
"The Bookshop has a thousand books, all colors, hues and tinges, and every cover is a door that turns on magic hinges." ~ Nancy Byrd Turner |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diana
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 1044
Location: Washington DC
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yulie, no one is talking about reviews. Red herring. I salute AAR for its role in pioneering honest reviews.
What truly puzzles me is the anger that comes out when we talk about topical Internet issues. Good grief, every freakin' day some romance blogger is talking about mean girls (absurd I agree--we are not girls), authors behaving badly, racism and misogyny in romance, what's wrong with idiot publishers, idiot commenters, idiot authors, idiot RWA, and on and on. Yet whenever the regulars here dare to discuss what bloggers are talking about the flailing about starts and we are questioned tor daring to express opinions. What's up with that?
I specifically brought up the Wendell incident. It was blogged about all over Romancelandia and generared hundreds of comments and opinions. Linda linked the 50 Shades brouhaha. Interesting topics and we are allowed to discuss them.
Yes, it's all very interesting, but sinister? Nah.
_________________
Diana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yulie
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 1045
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I didn't suggest that people in this thread were taking issue with AAR's reviews, but that the criticism now being leveled at other websites struck me as similar to what AAR faced in its early years. What some perceive as overly harsh, others might consider perfectly reasonable criticism. Just as AAR pioneered honest romance reviews, one can look at other websites as pioneering other types of important content (to use a non-controversial example: Teach Me Tonight with academic analysis of romance novels).
FWIW, I agree that Sarah Wendell should have been more upfront about her other business; disclosure is almost always a good idea, and I'm surprised that someone as bright and savvy as she appears to be made such an error. I disagree that posts about E.L. James and the ethical issues related to her publishing fanfic are mean girl behavior or stem from jealousy, motives that have been attributed to certain reviewers/bloggers.
Specifically regarding the example given - I find LJ-speak exhausting and generally need a good reason to wade through it. Skating news and gossip = good reason, 50 Shades bitching = not really. So I didn't read much of the linked post, and cannot comment regarding its merits or lack thereof. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Linda in sw va
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 4707
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yulie wrote: | | I- I find LJ-speak exhausting and generally need a good reason to wade through it. Skating news and gossip = good reason, 50 Shades bitching = not really. So I didn't read much of the linked post, and cannot comment regarding its merits or lack thereof. |
Yulie, fair enough!  Since you were questioning where is this new form of 'vicious' and I used the word in one of my replies (with that blog in mind) it is my example. I don't blame you in the least if you don't want to wade through it.
ETA: Diana, I read very few blogs, in fact maybe once in a blue moon, so I miss most of this stuff!
Linda
_________________
"The Bookshop has a thousand books, all colors, hues and tinges, and every cover is a door that turns on magic hinges." ~ Nancy Byrd Turner |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wendy in WI
Joined: 28 Jan 2009
Posts: 146
Location: Southern Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I really don't have the time to read many blogs. I've also never visited an author's web site, except to check for new releases, so I have to admit that I am not voicing a very informed opinion on this issue. Having said that, I have heard a lot about J.R. Ward's website & her behavior on it. It sounds like a small fiefdom, where certain fans are her pets...and woe on to the fan who implies even the smallest criticism of her work. As a result, I have completely lost respect for her. However, I still read her books. I do wish that I had never found about all of the drama associated with her, because I just don't enjoy the books as much as I used to. Admittedly, a number of people have fallen off of her "fan wagon", due to her writing style, etc. I have the same issues with her more recent works, but I also have to admit that part of my disenchantment also stems from how she conducts herself online. Is it unfair of me to partly judge her writing on the basis of her personal actions? Probably. Oh well, at least I'm honest enough to admit that my opinion of her writing is biased. LOL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yulie
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 1045
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Linda in sw va wrote: | | Yulie, fair enough! Since you were questioning where is this new form of 'vicious' and I used the word in one of my replies (with that blog in mind) it is my example. I don't blame you in the least if you don't want to wade through it. |
I do want to point out, however, that the website you linked to does not appear to be a romance blog. So even if the writer is out of line, it's not an example of mean-spirited behavior in the romance community. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Linda in sw va
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 4707
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yulie wrote: | | Linda in sw va wrote: | | Yulie, fair enough! Since you were questioning where is this new form of 'vicious' and I used the word in one of my replies (with that blog in mind) it is my example. I don't blame you in the least if you don't want to wade through it. |
I do want to point out, however, that the website you linked to does not appear to be a romance blog. So even if the writer is out of line, it's not an example of mean-spirited behavior in the romance community. |
The title of this thread is Author's Ethics and Author's Behavior. It is an authors blog site (if a fan fiction author counts as an author), who is referring to Fifty Shades of it's Grey and the author that wrote it. And may I remind you that Fifty Shades of Grey and the drama surrounding it was mentioned in the opening post of this thread. And it is in this romance discussion forum that this link was brought to my intention, to let me know how rotten the author supposedly is. This bad behavior was brought to our forum bya poster here, this bad behavior was by an author. I'd say it fits the discussion in all ways.
Linda
_________________
"The Bookshop has a thousand books, all colors, hues and tinges, and every cover is a door that turns on magic hinges." ~ Nancy Byrd Turner |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dick
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 2251
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I commented on the SmartBitches blog one time, taking a position adverse to the general tone of the discussion about the flap over the RWA chapter in Okla.'s refusal to accept MM romances. As a result I was the recipient of a number of ad hominem attacks, including the suggestion that my posting name was eponymous with my character. Such uncivil behavior towards non-PC positions cannot possibly make a web or blog site attractive to the general reader. In general, I concur with those who believe the internet has become less civil in the past year or two. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sandy AAR
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 443
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dick wrote: | | I commented on the SmartBitches blog one time, taking a position adverse to the general tone of the discussion about the flap over the RWA chapter in Okla.'s refusal to accept MM romances. As a result I was the recipient of a number of ad hominem attacks, including the suggestion that my posting name was eponymous with my character. Such uncivil behavior towards non-PC positions cannot possibly make a web or blog site attractive to the general reader. In general, I concur with those who believe the internet has become less civil in the past year or two. |
I'm sorry to hear that, dick. I,too, was burned in the early days of DA by posters who brought my upbringing into question. That was the last time for me.
_________________
Sandy AAR
Publisher and Senior Editor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diana
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 1044
Location: Washington DC
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dick wrote: | | I commented on the SmartBitches blog one time, taking a position adverse to the general tone of the discussion about the flap over the RWA chapter in Okla.'s refusal to accept MM romances. As a result I was the recipient of a number of ad hominem attacks, including the suggestion that my posting name was eponymous with my character. Such uncivil behavior towards non-PC positions cannot possibly make a web or blog site attractive to the general reader. In general, I concur with those who believe the internet has become less civil in the past year or two. |
Ouch! Getting back to the original topic, doesn't that make you want to just throw your money at authors who hang out in the shark pool? LOL!
_________________
Diana |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JaneO
Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 754
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In general, I would rather not know anything about the authors of books I enjoy. I think I might like many of them, from what I gather from their books, but then again, I might be wrong. In that case, ignorance (mine) is bliss. So the only author blogs I frequent are those like Nerdy History Girls, which offer interesting historical tidbits without telling me much of anything about the bloggers.
I might add that one of the things I like about this board is the absence of nastiness. People have even been known to apologize when something they said was taken the wrong way!
Would that the rest of the world operated the same way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tee
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 4047
Location: Detroit Metro
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JaneO wrote: | | I might add that one of the things I like about this board is the absence of nastiness. People have even been known to apologize when something they said was taken the wrong way! |
That's interesting, because I've been thinking just the opposite. There seems to be a level of personal nastiness here that I've not noticed before. We've gone through periods of it before, but then it usually goes away. I'm really sorry to see this because this has always been a site where one could give their opinion (respectfully, of course) and dialogue with opposing posters without being taken to the carpet for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mirole
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 257
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Linda in sw va wrote: | | Yulie wrote: | | I find all these accusations of unnamed parties in the romance community acting as bullies and mean girls very interesting. . |
Yulie, I don't think anyone is pointing to reviews that are critical, especially here at AAR. AAR has always done a fantastic job with reviews and no one is looking at 'Harriet Klausner' as a model of reviewing.
But since you asked about 'mean girls' and vicious behavior, in the 50s Shade thread I was given this link to a blog on live journal that just blew me away in it's nastiness.
http://gentleblaze.livejournal.com/514.html
|
Linda, first of all, I also went to check out Wide Awake or whatever it is called although I was not going to read it anyway but just to get a feel of the prose. Well, I found it very underwhelming compared to EL James's (and it was recommended to us as far superior, but tastes differ, I understand). It felt like the author was trying too hard and lacked a natural flow of narration that I liked in FSoG.
Then I went on her blog when I read this post of yours and look what I found
| Quote: |
While being commissioned to make this blog, SQID and I have multiple conversations regarding her desire to publish her story MotU. I advise SQID this is a bad idea, because:
1. The story is too big, and it'll get too much negative attention. There's no way to fly under the radar. MOTU is so popular that Stephenie Meyer herself already knows about it. The potential for legal issues, however low, is most evident with this story.
2. It's over 110 chapters and even with heavy editing, probably won’t make the transition from serialized fic to book form very well.
3. Because she could write something original (she has novels unpublished, she says) and still get thousands of readers, without any of the aforementioned badshit, and there's no reason not to do so. |
I was astounded at the reasons this fellow ff author (Gentleblaze) gave EL James (SQUID) for not publishing MoU. I would have thought she would come up with something like, "Are you mad, girl, how can you even think of such a sacrilegious thing as publishing a fanfic? Don't you know it's a no-no in the fanfic universe??!!!!"
As it stands now, she could not have been more wrong regarding items 1 and 2 (FSoG is exactly the same length as MoU or you can say it is exactly the same period, yet it is now #1 in the NY ebook Bestsellers list and there is a bidding war in Hollywood for the movie rights). Reason #3 can be construed very vaguely as a caution regarding moral implications of such a move but still she does not voice it directly.
I read Suzanne Brockmann's responses to some criticism (if you can call it that, more like bewildered readers' sincere questions) and was appalled. What I don't understand is how a writer cannot comprehend that even if your work is genius, you cannot expect 100% of the readers to like it because EVERYBODY'S TASTE IS DIFFERENT. Why risk alienating part of your future readership by posting such condescending and even snide remarks.
Still I have read #1 in her Troubleshooters series and liked it enough to continue (I did not care for the main couple but loved the overall feel and especially a secondary romance between an Asian-American computer geek and the hero's niece) so I am going to continue the series at least till book 5 or 6 (whatever Sam and Alyssa's story is) but in my mind I already divorced the author of the book from the person on the boards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
desiderata
Joined: 23 Oct 2007
Posts: 226
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't visit any author websites and the only romance reader site I routinely visit is this one, so I usually don't witness authors behaving badly or hear too much about ethical issues. I don't need to know about an author's personal life or opinions or personality, I just want to read great stories.
If I found out an author engaged in flat out unethical behavior related to writing (ie, plagiarism) I would never read her work again. If I saw an author behaving badly online toward a reader I would probably avoid buying her books. There are so many book choices out there, far more than I will ever have time to read. If someone acted like a total a$$ to a reader, I would see no reason to support that author as opposed to a neutral one.
I realize authors are also voracious romance readers and it's interesting to hear their opinions about specific books or romance in general, so I like having them on the board as fellow readers. It's a little uncomfortable when an author takes part in a thread about her book, but for the most part authors show grace and class even in the face of criticism, and that's pretty much what I expect from them. As Yulie said, they should do their complaining to their friends and family and put on their best behavior in public.
The one thing I don't like is when authors jump in to promote their books in the let's talk romance or potpourri forums. 9 out of 10 times it's not helpful to the OP, it's not that pertinent to the conversation, and they're intruding on readers' conversation with their self-promotion. There's a writer's forum for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
