Reviewing for Pleasure & Revenge

New authors ask me how to react when a reviewer seems to have a wooden stake to drive through their new novel or how to review other authors’ books. The questions make me evaluate how I regard reviews.

First, each book has qualities that may not work for me, but are probably the reason other readers love it. The very aspect that one reader enjoys, another will dislike. I know that and remind myself when I see reader reviews of books – other people’s and mine.

That’s the part of reviewing that’s hard for me: being an author. I want to say only encouraging things to other authors. I’ve been there. No one wants to read a harsh review of their work.

A review is, after all, one person’s opinion. My friend Brenda would often recite, “Opinions are like a$$#*les; everyone has one and it usually stinks.”

So, on sites like Amazon or GoodReads, I tend to not write reviews unless I’m crazy-infatuated with a book, and then I’ll keep focused on what I think other people will find interesting about it. 

Giving stars is difficult too. For a while, I gave 5-stars to every book I enjoyed, but it occurred to me that 4-stars are “great” and 5-stars means a book is “perfect.”  That was the performance evaluation criteria we had in the corporate world – I was always disappointed if I didn’t get a perfect evaluation.  Donna, my director, would remind me that I did not “walk on water.”

No book “walks on water” either. A 4-star review is a compliment to the work. I know I see a lot of all 5-star reviews. Moms and friends are kind to their writers. ;-)  Also, some authors have achieved teen idol status, so gushing reviews are common for household names or pretty writers. I like to read and to write well-thought reviews about what was enjoyable about the novel. A written review takes time and effort; I appreciate those for my own work and try to return that to others.

We can’t always be syrupy in admiration for a book, but if I find a book doesn’t speak to me, I stop reading and move to the next one on my list. I don’t release brimstone onto the author. A rabid, hateful review demonstrates more about the reviewer than it does of the targeted book.

That’s what I tell new authors about reviews. If the tone is harsh, the review is about something more than the book. It was written to be hurtful to the book’s author. Julia Cameron says “blocked creatives” can be very spiteful to those who are achieving what they long for.

 

Focus on encouragement and refinement when reading or writing a review from someone not of your relation! The old adage “If you can’t say something nice, say nothing at all” is a good rule for reviewing (and in life).

The new definition of "Traditional" Publisher

Publisher’s Weekly reported that in 2008 “On-Demand” books outpaced “Traditional” book production. 275,232 titles were produced and warehoused while 285,394 titles where produced and stored digitally.

A little history on book production technology: Print-On-Demand (POD) is a technology where a digital copy of the book is stored and used to print an original book when an order is placed. It’s like Wendy’s making your burger for you when you order it instead of making them hours earlier and keeping them lined up and waiting for customers. And this weekend at BEA in New York, the "Espresso Book Machine" will show how these POD titles can be printed in a bookstore when a customer requests it.

From the news release from Bowker, I’m guessing that they define "traditional publishers" as those that print and warehouse books. Now, I know that books keep longer than burgers, but the longer they’re warehoused, the more it costs the publisher, and eventually an author who doesn’t sell big in the first few months, has his books pulled from the distribution channels – the title is then out-of-print.

More publishers are seeing the benefit of POD technology and the savings in warehousing costs. Although the per book print costs are more, I'm surprised that "traditional publishers" haven't switched. The just-in-time model has been used in other industries for over 25 years. For authors, the books digital storage fees are small enough that the title can stay in print for years without having to achieve a profit in the first few months.

These statistics show that in order to survive, publishers are dropping the warehouse and moving to the technology of the 1990s -- finally. I know that both publishers of my books have used POD. They are "traditional publishers" that employee editors, graphic designers, marketers, pay royalties and pay advances, but they are also technology savvy.

A snide swipe at technology can be found in the reporting of POD produced books by the old guard of publishing since the innovators in most industries are the small and new players looking for ways to enter the market at a lower cost. Early POD publishing focused on short-run books, self-published books. That’s no longer the case with many small, independent, and boutique publishing houses using the technology.

As the report shows, POD publishing has become the popular majority in book production, so we need a new term for "Traditional Titles" -- how about "Warehoused Titles"??

POD titles are the new tradition.