 |
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) frankwu made a comment earlier about me linking to unfavorable reviews. Personally, I belong to the "if they spell your name right it's good press" school of thought. Perhaps excepting indictments for moral turpitude1 or something.
People don't usually get my name wrong in writing, except for the occasional "Joe Lake" because they've seen my legal name somewhere, or the somewhat annoying "Jake." In conversation, people will hear my surname as "Blake", which is why those of you who've been to dinner with me have heard me give my name as "Lake, like the water." But you know, I'm easy to find on the Internet, I'm easy to find on the bookshelf, and I'm easy to remember. Or at least my name is. Of such small blessings is life's good fortune constructed.2
Someone shared with me today, second/third hand, a discussion about small press publishing. It was like a voice shouting of the 1980s, about how low pay rates were taking advantage of authors, the markets were cliques and cabals, etc. Speaking as someone who came in through the small press and still spends considerable time there, um, no. And if you think that's true, don't submit. Problem solved.
I'm tempted to say the insecurity of authors knows no bounds, but someone would take that as a challenge. It sometimes comes out of the skinny end of the tube as paranoia. There is no conspiracy in publishing, just a whole lot of people doing their damndest for love of the written word. Write more, get better, sell. Don't forget to eat, sleep and love. It's the key to a happy career.
1. Which begs the question of whether there is any other kind of turpitude. Can one have felonious turpitude, or beefy turpitude, or green turpitude?
2. Other small blessings include Girl Scout thin mints, 75 mph speed limits and a good, solid afternoon nap.
Post A Comment | 19 Comments | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
I was at the secret cabal meeting today and nobody spelled your name right.
Reply | Thread | Link
That Jake Blake guy, I hear he's an all right writer.
Reply | Thread | Link
Just as long as they don't call you Jake Flake, okay?
My take on it is that it's all good. Press is press, and as we figured out in politics, name repetition is good. In teaching, we figure the more times we repeat it, the better.
Same for training the horse beasts.
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
| yourbob |
| 2007-03-15 05:29 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
|
Moral Turpentine* aside, as a reader as far as reviews go I think you're correct. There are reviewers whose taste I know I disagree with, so when they pan something I figure it's worth checking out. As an author you can't predict which side of their readership will be checking out your books.
And I know that the cabal of small press people talks to the cabal of large press people. So if you're on the black list of one, you ought to just give up, stop writing and drown in self pity.
*e.g. Newt Gingrich needs some of this right now.
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
| shadowhelm |
| 2007-03-15 05:51 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
| Disinclined |
|
Someone shared with me today, second/third hand, a discussion about small press publishing. It was like a voice shouting of the 1980s, about how low pay rates were taking advantage of authors, the markets were cliques and cabals, etc. Speaking as someone who came in through the small press and still spends considerable time there, um, no. And if you think that's true, don't submit. Problem solved.
What are they smoking? Yeah, the pay at small press isn't always top dollar, but geez, they're awfully friendly at the small press side.
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
| dinogrl |
| 2007-03-15 05:52 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
| Nemo butt |
|
As for number one: I like cheezy turpitude myself, being vegitarian an' all, and as for number two? Twins of dif'rent moms.
MMMmm. Minty turpitude, pedal to metal, and zzzzzz's.
I also relate to the name thing. "Spring, yes that's right, Spring. Yes, I said Spring, like the season??????? YES, that IS my name."
And bad press is good press. Look what it's done for Brittney Spears!
Oh, shame on me.
Don't go cuttin' teh Hair, Jay.
Reply | Thread | Link
Small press low pay rates aren't taking advantage of authors. Vanity presses and unscrupulous agents are there for that.
I think it's only fair to link to any and all reviews of one's work. Of course, I think that because I don't have many reviews yet, and they're pretty positive... I did noticem when I set myself up on Writertopia (in a fit of gratuitous hubris, since I was technically eligible for the Campbell award this year) that at least one writer on there had a couple of quoted reviews which pretty much slated his/her work - and those were the only reviews showing. Whetehr they were the only reviews the author in question had, or whether said author was taking a perverse delight in posting up bad reviews (hey, it takes all sorts), I can't be sure.
Bookshelf positioning - I notice you nudge up against Mercedes Lackey, which can't hurt. My real name will sit me nicely next to Donaldson. I'll know I've made it when my section of the bookshelf is bigger than his :)
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
| klingonguy |
| 2007-03-15 11:52 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
| LEGO |
|
I'm much more intrigued by the prospects of immoral turpitude.
I believe it is one of the grounds for terminating the tenure of demons.
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
| matociquala |
| 2007-03-15 11:52 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
| criminal minds garcia challenge me |
|
The ones I hate are not the bad reviews, but the glowing reviews that get a couple of things truly stupidly wrong.
Sort of takes the polish off. *g*
I can get some amusement value out of a really serious hatchet job.
Reply | Thread | Link
Top of the list of typos et cetara that I sent Scott Lynch after reading the proofs of The Lies Of Locke Lamora was the spelling of a certain ticket-related sirname that was lacking it's second 't'! Heh.
As for the small press topic, well said. This is why I have a lot of time for you and your thoughts on writing and, shall we say, less for many others!
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
|
It seems wise to be philosophical about reviews, especially if they are for the most part good.
Speaking as someone who has read scifi most of her life, I have several fav authors who have many, many books published. Do I like every single one of them? Not really. Do I still think they are wonderful authors? You bet!
A bad review may not really be that someone panned your work, a bad review seems to me to be something that you get nothing out of in the way of useful feedback. "This book sucks because I hated it." and all it's iterations is a bad review. "This author can't write." is a pretty bad one too, I guess, although that's often a matter of opinion. "I didn't care for this book." is not necessarily bad, although it I suppose it could affect sales.
When I'm curious about an author and want to buy something they've written, I go to Amazon or some place like that and look at the reviews. If they are all one hundred percent glowing, without any caveats, I tend to get a little suspicious, simply because no one is perfect, and no one can please everyone. I also tend to like authors who have some quirks - ones that often get somewhat mixed reviews. What a person DIDN'T like about a book can actually be enticing to me.
But that's just me - and what do I know? :D Anyway I thought you writer types might find a reader type's pov on reviews mildly interesting. Hence the long post. ;-)
Reply | Thread | Link
|
|
|
|
|
