Why Do I Bother?

Oh dear. I seem to have upset someone with one of my reviews.

I am no stranger to upsetting people, especially sensitive literary types as you probably know, but this time I was actually trying to be nice.

Here's what happened. A self-published author sent me a copy of his book. I read a bit, thought it was OK if nothing special but wanted to give it a mention nonetheless. I like to give a bit of airtime to small presses and self-published authors if I can and tend to prioritse their books over those from major publishers.

Normally I would feature the book in my Quick Flicks sidebar. These are short reviews based on, you've guessed it, a quick flick. Quite how much of a flick varies but usually I have read 50 pages or so. Naturally, not every book that gets the flick treatment then goes on to my To Be Read pile but I try to post sufficient information to pique your interest. Judging by my Amazon stats quite a few people do buy books based on these mini reviews.

Because of the way Typepad is set up I can only feature a book if it has an ISBN and is listed on Amazon. The book in question did not and was not, but rather than ignore it I wrote a brief post within my main blog. You can read it here.

And if you scroll down once you have clicked through you can also read the author's complaint.

Now, he has a point. I cannot possibly understand the book or do it justice if I do not read the whole thing. I couldn't agree more, but then I don't claim to be doing either. As should be obvious from the title of the blog post, I am offering a quick impression, nothing more. Granted, that impression may change if I perservered with the whole thing, although in six years of buying books for a living that rarely actually happened.

I could argue that if he had written a better book then I would have read more of it, and I would also have a point, but instead I thought I would focus on the positive. Although in doing so I seem to have pissed him off. That wasn't my intention.

I find it interesting that in two and a half years of blogging I have only received four complaints about reviews I have posted (or not posted) on here. All of these were from self-published authors. Does that tell us anything? Two felt that I could have been more fulsome with my praise (which I would have been if their books had been more than just average), another was cross that I hadn't reviewed his book (it was shit and I wish I had) and now this.

On the flipside, the same day that Mr Male left his comment I received a lovely email from Random House thanking me for my Quick Flick review of the Reif Larsen novel. They aren't the first to have done so either.

Perhaps I am trying too hard to give a mention to everything that comes my way, and maybe my desire to be as positive as possible about books from small presses and self-published authors is counter-productive, but that isn't going to stop me trying to do my, albeit rather small, bit to give them some profile.

All I will say is that if you send me a book to review then do bear in mind that I will review it any bloody way I want, be that a full review, mini-review, quick flick, vitriolic sentence, rhyming couplet, mime, origami, semaphore or rock opera.

So there.

Comments

[DJ Kirkby]

I was pleased with the quick flick review I had from you. I do regret not cutting and pasting it somehwere! Live and learn...However, after reading this post I am now feeling a bit sulky that you didn't think my book was good enough to write a rock opera about. ;)

[Rachel Green]

You're a busy man. I was pleased with a quick-flick too, though I so want to see an origami review!

[Sally Z]

Great post, Scott. Spot on. And, sadly, my lower-profile experience of book reviewing and manuscript reading echoes everything you say. And I'm no the only one.

[Tim Atkinson]

Well, I for one think you should have placed my name in lights, shouted my novel's title from the roof-tops and bought oh... at least a dozen copies for yourself. And as for providing free publicity, you should probably be paying us for the privilege of reading our books. Reviewers, eh?

[Tim Atkinson]

I'm back. I've just read the 'offending' review. This guy's a marketing genius. Your review is positively fulsome. He just wants more, more, more!

[tj]

Do you know in the two years of having a bookshop, I get the same problem. I.E the only complaints I have had so far are from self-published authors. Most come in asking if I can stock their book and of course I do (payment when sold obviously). Some sell in quantity, some sell to their friends and acquaintances and some do not sell at all. And obviously it’s the latter that causes problems. With some authors it’s not enough to have the book on the shelf in the right category, Why isn’t the book displayed in the chart, Why isn’t my hand made A4 poster up? Do you know you’ll sell loads if you took that bestseller out of the window and put mine in there? Why don’t you just buy 10 now and I’ll refund you if you don’t sell etc etc. I even had someone tell me I now have to buy the copies of the book because they have been on the shelf so long the pages are yellowed!!! I could go on and on, but luckily for you, I wont.

[jem]

For as long as I've been reading your blog I think it's pretty obvious that you blog as a book lover who hopes to share the books he reads with others who may or may not like them. I've found lots of books I might have otherwise missed through your blog. And I've found you to be a mostly warm and open blogger. You share your responses to the books. And that is what I want to read. You don't claim to any particular code of balance or fairness but in fact you offer quite a bit of it.

I'd love to hear about self-published books if you think they are worth mentioning, and perhaps worth my reading. And I may have checked out the book in question if the author hadn't totally put me off by his manner of commenting. It struck me as pushy and a little desperate. I hope that one day if I complete my book and dare to send it to you then I will accept graciously your review in whatever form it takes and allow my book to speak for me.

[Scott Pack]

TJ - that doesn't surprise me at all. My worry is that this sort of behaviour puts people off supporting small publishers in the first place.

Jem - I quite liked 'mostly warm'.

[Jane Smith]

Ah, Scott, I feel your pain. My own blog has attracted its own fair share of self-published and vanity published writers over the last few months, and many of them were not at all happy with me.

I have a book coming out later this year called "The Trivium: the Liberal Arts of Grammar, Logic and Rhetoric". If I send you a copy I will expect you to review it through the medium of dance, or possibly by a Petrarchan sonnet, and if you don't then I shall flounce about it all over the internet, you wait and see if I don't.

[kevin duffy]

Scott,

Do bother. For small independent publishers like Bluemoose blogsites like yours are essential in showcasing what's new and different out there. National Newspaper reviewers seem to think it beyond small publishers to actually publish great books from gifted writers. Tell your man at least you've given him some sort of window to showcase his wares.

[Maria]

My thought when I hear these stories is to suggest that self-pubbed authors spend a day or three at the library. Just stare at the books. All those books. Count them. Ask the librarian how many new arrivals come in each month--new--and then how many are donated. All those books. Perhaps it might make a person realize the stiff competition for attention. Probably not, but perhaps.

[Yen]

I'm with you Scott on this one. It's not your responsibility to provide full in-depth reviews of everything that comes your way! And I, as a reader, fully appreciate the short ones, the not-so-great ones, the critical and less critical ones.

[Howard Male]

TJ wrote, "I hope that one day if I complete my book and dare to send it to you then I will accept graciously your review in whatever form it takes and allow my book to speak for me."

This is the point I've been trying to make (over where the book is reviewed) - I would have graciously accepted anything Scott had to say had he finished the novel. Why is that concidered to be an unreasonable position to take?

If I restaurant critic went to a new restaurant, only had a glass or wine and a starter, would you consider whatever they wrote about that restaurant gave a fair picture of it?

[George Stirling]

Ye Gods, not rock opera!

[Jamieson Wolf]

I think your Quick Flicks are a grand idea (and I wish I had thought of them first.

Should you wish to review one of the books I've sent you, I would love it if you did the review in Slam Poetry. Bongo drums are opptional of course.

Ooo! Or maybe you could review one of my books using tribal chanting and dancing...the loin cloth is, again, optional. Oooo! Or maybe a review by interpretive dance? That could be neat. We could sell tickets!

With so many many many books out there, I consider it an honour when someone mentions my books on their blog, web site, etc, even if it's a bad review.

I mean, at least they read it right? And any publicity is good publicity. I even thank authors for bad reviews (odd, I know).

I was intriqued by your Quick Flick and the cover. But I won't read the book now; I just can't stand whiners. I keep wanting to ask if they want cheese with their wine. LOL

But please do continue with the Quick Flicks. They're grand,fun and frequent. And lovely too!

[Jamieson Wolf]

I think your Quick Flicks are a grand idea (and I wish I had thought of them first.

Should you wish to review one of the ebooks I've sent you, I would love it if you did the review in Slam Poetry. Bongo drums are opptional of course.

Ooo! Or maybe you could review one of my books using tribal chanting and dancing...the loin cloth is, again, optional. Oooo! Or maybe a review by interpretive dance? That could be neat. We could sell tickets!

With so many many many books out there, I consider it an honour when someone mentions my books on their blog, web site, etc, even if it's a bad review.

I mean, at least they read it right? And any publicity is good publicity. I even thank authors for bad reviews (odd, I know).

I was intriqued by your Quick Flick and the cover. But I won't read the book now; I just can't stand whiners. I keep wanting to ask if they want cheese with their wine. LOL

But please do continue with the Quick Flicks. They're grand,fun and frequent. And lovely too!

[Sally Z]

Poor Mr Male. He still doesn't get the point of quick flicks, does he?

I wouldn't expect Scott to get beyond the over of my forthcoming novel Hope Against Hope, even though it's from a publisher he thinks well of. It isn't his sort of thing at all. Indeed, I am convinced he'd hate it.

Mr Male has no idea how lucky he is--and he still complains. Sheesh.

[Scott Pack]

I am sure Mr Male is a lovely chap, is nice to old ladies and gives lots of money to charity. I do hope he doesn't feel too hounded.

I often receive requests for reviews from people who aren't overly familiar with my blog, and perhaps that is what has happened here. Someone who reads Me And My Big Mouth regularly would know all about Quick Flicks and probably wouldn't have an objection to them.

Despite my press, I really don't like annoying people.

[Judie La Flamme]

Any author should be grateful to you for even flipping through a book. Love the Quick Flicks-keep 'em coming, Scott.

[Tom Vowler]

Scott

I have just finished my magnum opus (or magnificent octopus, as Baldrick termed it). It's really rather good. Set both in the future and the past, with some bits in the present, I regard it as Jane Austen meets Ali G. My bother-in-law's friend says it's, and I quote, 'probably his book of the year'. Alas, none of the major (or minor) publishing houses have seen sense, so I have published it at home on my new Canon iP3600. I thought you could devote a themed week to it on your fair blog. Can you send me a large A4 envelope with sufficient postage to cover the 803 page MS, and I will pop it in the post.

Many thanks

Tom

http://oldenoughnovel.blogspot.com/

[Steerforth]

My experiences with self-published authors have been almost entirely negative. I realise that it must be extremely dispiriting to labour away at a novel for several years, only to find your magnum opus met with a wall of indifference. But from my point of view, it was really frustrating to be confronted with books that had dreadful covers, no marketing campaign and, all to often, no ISBN or bar code.

Whenever I raised these objections, the author usually suggested that I read the book to discover its merits. Sorry, but life's too short.

It's to your credit that you bother at all with books like Mr Male's. I know that there are the occasional hidden gems (like Imran Ahmed's'Unimagined'), but they are few and far between.

[JonathanM]

Hi, Scott it's a bit fiddly but actually a perfectly simple task to put books on your sidebar in Typepad without using the isbn or Amaz*n, which is useful as not all of us want to link there.

As it happens I have read Etc Etc Amen all the way through (although I had nothing to do with Howard contacting you - presumably he emailed you for your address, and presumably you were intigued enough by his fan club to ask him to send you a copy - perhaps it might not be a bad idea to have a straightforward printed set of rules/conditions for such people)and greatly enjoyed it - and this when I barely knew the man. I still barely know him.

It was, incidentally, a much better book than the advance copy of a new novel by a very popular best-selling sucessful *cult* author that I was reading last night. That was complete shit.

Finally, It's perhaps a shame that more of the people who have left comments on here didn't start by reading John Self's more measured comment at the beginning of the first post, don't you think?

Interesting too, I think, to consider how some of our more famous authors might have faired were they starting out now in the internet age when small facets of our personality can so easily be misinterpreted online. A wellknown fantasy writer, for one, comes readily to mind.

[Scott Pack]

On the plus side, Howard Male has a lot of people talking about his book now.

And I know that people like the Quick Flicks.

Everyone's a winner.

There is an interesting discussion to be had about self-published authors and how they go about selling their wares. One for a future post methinks.

[Maria]

To answer the question posed, yes, I would take into consideration the opinion of someone that stopped by a restaurant and only had an appetizer or wine (or soda for that matter) and gave it a review. It says something, I'm afraid. If the "review" mentioned the menu and gave the drink and appetizer high marks, but the guy wasn't interested in eating there (perhaps not his type of food) his opinion still counts, especially if it is someone whose opinion I read on a regular basis. That's the whole point. Reviewers all have styles and preference. That they bother to talk about a particular book (or food) at all is still getting the word out and is a kindness. And reviewers of food or books are entitled to form their opinion on just a few pages or an appetizer as it were.

[Gary Davison]

Well, well. A rare moment where I feel I must pipe up in defence of you Mr Pack. You are currently giving me a whipping on the betting challenge, so take it from me a low profile is what is required right now, so I must feel strongly about this, mustn't I? Here comes the essence of one of your reviews, and anyone that follows this blog, knows this: you sink or swim on here. You offer up you wares and you can expect a large portion of the truth, and if you're lucky, the down sides to your book are kept of air. Anyone who knows books, knows alot of the time it's what isn't said that tells the true tale. You reviewed my novel on here, and let me tell you, on the strength of the praise - and it wasn't all good, only three starts when surely four were warranted - I got a lot of attention and sales off it. The publishers still use parts of the review when marketing now and I was well chuffed with the air time. So, it's fair game, and if it wasn't, who would value your review if you kissed everyone's arse? No one. It's valued because it's what you think. Enough said. I'm off to try and find a 125-1 winner for tomorrow.

[pierre l]

I have just been reading all those comments, and don't really have anything to add.
Except, re the title: I enjoy reading your blog, I read most of the posts, I have discovered several interesting books here, I probably buy far too many books.
Please do continue to bother. Many thanks for all your efforts.

[Annie]

Oh please review my book in semaphore. I love the idea of it.

[Adrian Graham]

Hi - It's incredibly difficult to get people to take notice of a new self-published book, let alone get someone with credibility to review it. Proper marketing is one of the many big advantages that go along with getting a book published through a trade publisher. Naturally self-publishing is not easy to do well and gets very frustrating.

One of the hard truths about writing is learning to take negative criticism, and learning from it. The reviewer is free to say what they like. Writers have to respect that - even if they don't agree with it.

My own book of short stories was reviewed here in the quick flicks section a short time ago and it got an 'ok'. Frankly I was happy that someone involved in the trade had taken my self-published book seriously.

[Ian Hocking]

Scott, as someone whose book you agreed to review - way back when - I think you're doing a good thing overall. But I think you need to consider that in this situation you're the big guy and the author is the little guy. The book means almost nothing to you and means very much to the author. I'm not saying that you should turn the other cheek. I'm suggesting that you take care about how you deal with responses to your reviews. The author has the pea-shooter of the comments field, while you have the double-barred shotgun of the post. The author has now been painted as some kind of publicity whore, and I'm not sure that's the case. He wanted to reply to you about your review. That's why you have comments, isn't it?

To repeat, you have every right to say what you want on your blog. I think the author has the right to reply to you. In responding to him, I think you should use reasonable force.

[Scott Pack]

I think you make a good point very well, Ian. As a blogger I do think it's OK to pick out threads and comments and elevate them to the main page. I have done just that for a number of things in the past - both positive and negative - so even if I am wrong to do so then at least I am consistent.

The main reason I posted separately about this was that the original post was some days ago and Howard's comment came a couple of days after it had appeared, meaning that both were some way down the page.

This whole debate throws up all manner of issues which I think are worth discussing. I am fascinated by the number of people who have had dealings with self-published authors and found them to be a right royal pain in the arse. This is a message that would be good to get out there as it might help other authors, prompting them to take stock before doing something similar.

But when it comes to this particular instance I think it boils down to one thing - research your market. If you send a book to a blogger to review and that blogger makes a habit and prominent feature of quick flick reviews then don't complain when said blogger does just that with your book.

[Sade Adeniran]

Scott, please don't give up. Your review of Imagine This did wonders for it's profile. Since then it's gone on to win the Commonwealth Prize for best first book and has been shortlisted for World Book Day.

http://www.spread-the-word.org.uk/pages/books-2009/book-detail.asp?BookID=17

I for one, am a very grateful self-published author who appreciates your hard work. I'd probably still be languishing in obscurity if you hadn't shone your beacon on my efforts.

Sx

[tj]

Nothing to add, just wanted to get the comments up to 32.

[Allen Parker]

If he doesn't want his quick flick review, can I have it? You can just change the name and title and I'll be happy.

Although I have had reviews I didn't like, I was sure to say thanks for the time and that I appreciated the amount of work that goes into reviewing our work. Secretly, I copied all the bad stuff down and began looking for it in my work. Ultimately, I think it made me a better writer.

Often we learn more from people willing to tell us the truth than from people telling us we are great.

[Lauren]

It has been quite interesting to read the original review and comments as well as these. There is a lot to think about, and I am grateful for the wide variety of opinions and thoughts.

One thing I do wish to comment on is that I was intially impressed by the review, then put off by Mr. Male's initial comment, but have come around to admire the strength and humbleness of Howard in admitting his error. It takes courage to admit you are wrong and to apologize, especially in front of a rather large public.

I own a literary web site that offers, among other things, book reviews. Before that, I was a reviewer for my city's newspaper. Two incidents still stand out for me during those three years.

The first was that after reviewing a great book I received a handwritten note on a lovely notecard (my first and only to date), thanking me for the review and expressing his appeciation of both my writing and the accuracy of the review. I still have that card tucked inside the book and take it out every once in a while to read it. And to this day he remains on my "will review" list.

The second was the opposite. I received a thriller based on an important local story of more than 20 years prior. The book, unfortunately, was terrible. I declined to review it. The author kept after me, sending me several more emails arguing with me. I stopped responding so she then went over my head directly to the managing editor. He turned it back to me. Need I say I was furious. She obviously thought he would order me to review it. She was wrong. And unlike the author above, she remains on my "never talk to again" list.

So, Howard, I just wanted to tell you that while I think you did make a mistake in your first comment I also believe you have redeemed yourself. Don't worry that he didn't read the entire book. You got a great review, your book still sounds intriguing to me, and you seem like a good man who has learned an important lesson. I have bookmarked your book and intend to buy it with next month's paycheck.

[Kate Allan]

I have a complaint! You've never reviewed my book, Perfidy and Perfection. Could I have a rhyming couplet please?

[friend of rachel worth]

All of this for what I saw as
1) scott doing a mini review
2) author saying he was slightly disappointed that Scott didnt read the whole thing

At this point I was thinking .. sounds a bit pompous - quote 'Etc Etc Amen' is not a prose-orientated book. Yes, I would like to think that the prose more than adequately serves its purpose in getting the reader fairly smoothly from A to B, but my aim was mainly to achieve transparency in the prose(just as Magritte didn't want his pictures to be judged for the quality of their brushwork.)" - well that put me off for a start

3) Scott responds with why do i bother

i think "thats a bit over the top and will no doubt prompt lots of please dont give up type posts but then again it is his blog and we all have a choice whether we read it as Howard had a choice as to send his book to soctt or not"

4 Howard becomes the anti christ

5 at last a sensible post by Ian Hocking as part of Scott's why do i bother post

6 Scott posts a very well put reply acknowledging good point well made and clarifying his post

7 Howard is still the antichrist (but the attacks are starting to feel ridiculous and over the top)

8 In true british style I'm starting to cheer for the under dog

[Scott Pack]

Kate, that's purely because Caroline still has it!!

[Lee]

I've always appreciated that you read some of my first novel and never minded that you didn't much like it, which was only to be expected. One of the reasons I've chosen the indie route is because I can write what I like, exactly how I like - not to that I don't hope to keep learning my craft. I'm not going to use that dreadful term 'self-published', because you can see from most of the comments just how well that goes over.

As you know better than most, Scott, the face of publishing is changing, and I expect that indie writers will have their place - and their readers too - in future. Maybe not many readers, but writing is not - or shouldn't be - a numbers game.

I noticed that John Self gave Howard Male a rather backhanded compliment about not plugging his book at Self's own blog, though I'm not sure just how sarcastically this is meant. Is such a plug so awful? Indies have to do everything themselves. I think Ian has a good point about the unseemliness - possibly downright unkindness - of the Big Guns firing away at the little guys.

I've made it a strict policy never, but never, to discuss my work in public, though I always link to all reviews, favourable or otherwise. In any case, a writer is not necessarily a good critic.

[Simon T]

Well, I'd never have read Howard's novel based on the first review alone, but now I feel very sorry for him and might seek it out!