Dealing with reviews.

[ALB2012]

I found this - Getting Some Perspective on Bad (and Good) Reviews | Richard Levesque

Reviews can be difficult to deal with. It is often upsetting to receive a bad review but unless there are several all saying the same thing it is is an opinion. that is all. Sometimes people do not like a book. It could be anything from not being able to get the deeper meaning (if there is one), being insulted by something, thinking the book was something it wasn't or simply not enjoying the read. We have all been there. The next reader might think the book is wonderful.

My advice - go somewhere - shout, cry, shake your fists then when that is out of your system re-read the review - is there something you as a writer CAN do to improve? Is there something perhaps which was missed, or clunky phrases. It may not be something worth pulling the book for an edit but it might be worth considering for a future work.

There are, of course, people who simply like to cause mayhem and hurt...

Not everyone will like your book, as you will not like every book you read.

The advice about good reviews is handy too. Don't get too complacent.

 

[Mara Edgerton]

I, um, try not to read my reviews. I stressed myself so much over one review by a person who was clearly not in my target audience that--oh, never mind. Now I keep my focus on my sales report instead. If people are buying, I figure something is right.

 

[ALB2012]

That is true, it has to be said there are some odd reviews. I think some people leave snarky reviews to be mean. Why read a book you know you won't like.

 

[The Dark One]

I wrote a piece on my blog site called: Advice for the Newly Published: How to Cope with a Bad Review, which might give you a chuckle.

Not sure of the rules here so I haven't linked it, but you can easily google it if interested. My blog is called The Book Hammer.

 

[BWFoster78]

I agree with what the author of the blog post says.

In general, feedback is great. It's an opportunity to learn something.

First, make sure that your writing quality is where it should be. If people are constantly on you about your technique, you probably need to improve your technique.

Second, you need to evaluate whether the reader is your audience. Some people like world building more than character. I'm never going to please those people as much as I am readers who want character-driven stories. I accept that.

Third, even if the critiquer isn't part of your audience, you need to figure out if there's something you can learn from the review.

Fourth, fix what you can. Ignore the rest.

 

[BWFoster78]

I, um, try not to read my reviews. I stressed myself so much over one review by a person who was clearly not in my target audience that--oh, never mind. Now I keep my focus on my sales report instead. If people are buying, I figure something is right.

This post made me curious to check out your work, but my search for "Mara Edgerton" on Amazon didn't return any results.

 

[Mara Edgerton]

This post made me curious to check out your work, but my search for "Mara Edgerton" on Amazon didn't return any results.

Mara Edgerton is a new pen name for me. I publish more mature (D/s or slavefic, often fantasy) novels under another name. But I wanted to write more general stuff also--stuff my Mom can read and rec to her friends without embarrassment. (Mom, anything you see under 'Mara Edgerton' is safe for you to read!)

The review in question was not by someone who hated D/s, by the way. It was for a fluffy D/s story--and I couldn't have made it any more obvious that it was fluff--and she hated fluff with a passion. Oy.

Was there something I could take away from her review? In fairness, yes. And I may even revise one or two scenes. She'll still hate the story, but that's ok. But the stress--I don't know if I want to put myself through that again. It'll be a while before I look at my reviews!

 

[BWFoster78]

Was there something I could take away from her review? In fairness, yes. And I may even revise one or two scenes. She'll still hate the story, but that's ok. But the stress--I don't know if I want to put myself through that again. It'll be a while before I look at my reviews!

When I started this whole writing thing, I was much more sensitive to negative criticism than I am now.

I think what helped me is:

1. Understanding that writing is freaking tough and creating the perfect document is impossible.
2. Understanding that the worst book ever written will have at least one person who loves it and the best book will have at least one who absolutely hates it.
3. Understanding and accepting my flaws as a writer. There are some things that I don't do well. Some of those things I don't know if I'll ever fix; others I'm working on.
4. Looking on critiques as a learning opportunity.
5. Understanding that getting someone to write you a review is a difficult thing. People are busy, and not many are going to take the time to do so.

Now, I really do appreciate any feedback (other than something like, "You're an idiot!").

EDIT: I should have added to that last sentence, only part way tongue in cheek, that I'm still looking for reviews on my blog for my novelette

 

[wordwalker]

This is similar to what I say in my writer's groups: treat each response like a statesman does one part of a poll.

That is, that it's one share of your readership that wants more of one thing, and so you ask yourself how much you can do for them without using up too much time or hurting what's important to you. Improve your basics, certainly, maybe make an adjustment to help them, but accept that other people Just Won't Agree.

(The article also said not to feel proud for randomly good reviews. I don't quite agree there; you chose your subject and tone, and knew it would turn off some readers, so why not look at the fans it won and say "Guess the choice worked"? Writing has stress enough as it is.)

 

[Mara Edgerton]

You bring up a good point: be grateful for reviews. (And, honestly, even bad reviews help get your stuff noticed.) That said, not reading reviews is a legitimate choice for authors; I know extremely successful authors who make a rule of not reading them. It's gratifying to get a glowing review, devastating to get a terrible one . . . and those highs and lows are not as valuable to improving our craft as the insights from our dedicated crit groups.

Moreover--well, the reviews aren't for us. The reviews are targeted at other readers. In a weird sort of way, the reviews of my books are none of my business. The purpose of a review is to help other readers decide if they want to invest in a particular book. It's not to help an author improve her craft. Sometimes the two goals overlap, but I'd just as soon leave my improvements to my crit groups and let the reviewers focus on other readers.

 

[PaulineMRoss]

It'll be a while before I look at my reviews!

It must be incredibly difficult not to read any at all. I've heard of people who get a friend to read them and forward the good ones, but most authors seem to read them, even relatively famous names.

I think some books are just going to attract negative comment. Anything edgy or genre-blending or a bit 'out there', anything with oodles of bad language or graphic sex, anything that's at the extreme end of a genre is going to have some readers who are shocked or just don't get it. So the blurb becomes extra-important, to ensure that readers don't mistake that cutting edge M/M werewolf erotica (or whatever) for something a little more mainstream.

But please don't stop writing whatever you want to write just because one or two people don't get it.

 

[Mara Edgerton]

It must be incredibly difficult not to read any at all. I've heard of people who get a friend to read them and forward the good ones, but most authors seem to read them, even relatively famous names.

Someday I'll peek again, because I won't be able to resist. But, apart from dreading the swings between despair and elation, I still feel that reviews are for readers, not for authors--and in a way, I'm sort of intruding by reading them.

I think some books are just going to attract negative comment. Anything edgy or genre-blending or a bit 'out there', anything with oodles of bad language or graphic sex, anything that's at the extreme end of a genre is going to have some readers who are shocked or just don't get it. So the blurb becomes extra-important, to ensure that readers don't mistake that cutting edge M/M werewolf erotica (or whatever) for something a little more mainstream.

Agreed, although the real flamers, I hope, are pretty rare. I haven't gotten any reviews from someone who hated the overall genre. I think most people who write reviews do so in good faith, and not to flame. (Even that one review that stressed me so much was written by a reader into the genre, just not into the fluffier side of it.)

But please don't stop writing whatever you want to write just because one or two people don't get it.

Oh, I won't! It would take more than bad reviews to get me to stop writing the genres I love.

 

[Feo Takahari]

I think some books are just going to attract negative comment. Anything edgy or genre-blending or a bit 'out there', anything with oodles of bad language or graphic sex, anything that's at the extreme end of a genre is going to have some readers who are shocked or just don't get it. So the blurb becomes extra-important, to ensure that readers don't mistake that cutting edge M/M werewolf erotica (or whatever) for something a little more mainstream.

Story time: my first short for Literotica was built around strong sadomasochistic play within a romantic context. I tagged it for such, but put it in the Fantasy section due to the fantastical plot. I neglected to consider that on Literotica, all the tags appear at the end of the story.

I horrified so many readers . . .

On-topic, I read all the reviews that were left for that story. Some of them kind of hurt (one fairly major writer whose work I'd read thought the story was completely stupid), but I also got some useful criticism that I was able to learn from. For me personally, I think reading the reviews was worth it.

Edit: In response to Mara's posts, it might depend on what you're going for. My intent as an author is ultimately to be a crowd-pleaser--I write about my own ideas, but I try to frame them to be appealing and interesting,and I'm not always highbrow in my methods. My reviews matter to me because they're by the people whose approval I care most about. (I'm not familiar enough with Mara to know what her goal as a writer is, so I don't mean to disparage her--we may just have different intentions.)

 

[Mara Edgerton]

Edit: In response to Mara's posts, it might depend on what you're going for. My intent as an author is ultimately to be a crowd-pleaser--I write about my own ideas, but I try to frame them to be appealing and interesting,and I'm not always highbrow in my methods. My reviews matter to me because they're by the people whose approval I care most about. (I'm not familiar enough with Mara to know what her goal as a writer is, so I don't mean to disparage her--we may just have different intentions.)

I don't think I'd call myself a crowd pleaser--I write the stuff I love, which generally resonates with specific audiences. Under that other pen-name, all my stuff is about power-exchange (romantic D/s, slavefics, etc. and almost always LGBT). I get some readers who aren't into that but just like my characters and/or the fantasy settings, but the majority are people who are looking for that sort of thing.

As Mara, I want to combine mystery and fantasy--still LGBT, but without the more adult material. The stories may be for a more general audience in one sense . . . but, no, not really. Ultimately, I'm still into specific genres.

I guess, in the end, I'm a pretty hard-core genre writer who appeals to certain target audiences.