(I know a lot of you have been over this, but I started this blog to work some things out for myself, and that’s what I’m doing here. Apologies for reinventing the wheel, but it’s my speciality!)
Arguments against:
1. Reviews should be as objective as possible. You can’t really be unbiased when you review a friend’s book: you’ll see the book through friend-colored glasses. Eliminating this source of bias makes the review better and more valuable.
2. Bias may not affect your assessment of the book, but your concern for your friend’s feelings may affect how you write the review (you might soften your tone, avoid the snarky critique you are known for, try to highlight the positives a bit too eagerly, etc.). Readers depend on honest reviews, and pulling your punches when you normally wouldn’t, is dishonest.
2b. The main problem is not dishonesty, but fairness: you might be able write a negative review of a friend’s book, but will you be softer on your friend than you would on an equally bad book by a stranger?
Maili, who posted on this in 2005 at Romancing the Blog commented:
I don’t see it as a conflict of interest whenever a reviewer reviews a friend’s book, but it does become a conflict of interest when the reviewer slanted it to prevent hurting the friend’s feelings. This is not exclusive to the romance genre, of course, but it’s an issue that needs to be addressed or at least, acknowledged.
3. Regardless of whether being friends with the author actually causes the problems described in 1 or 2 above, there is the appearance of a conflict of interest, which damages the credibility of the review, the review site, and perhaps — if widespread — of the genre.
On this point, also at RtB, Teresa commented:
One of my rules is I don’t accept books from friends for review withOUT securing their agreement that I will give my honest opinion. And even then, I rarely review books of people I’m friendly with, to avoid even the appearance of my positive words being bought.
Arguments in favor:
1. Bias? What bias? It’s possible to review a friend’s book without bias.
In defense of this view, at RtB Cindy wrote:
I have author friends and reader friends as well. I don’t see it as a conflict of interest if I review a friends’ book, as long as I’m honest about it.
2. Bias? We love bias! Bring it on! Forget trying to eliminate bias, because book reviews are subjective, period. If it’s not this particular bias, it’s some other one. And those subjective aspects may actually enhance the review.
A 2005 Slate article, Fair is Square: the Case for Biased Book Reviews, contends that reviewing with a personal stake (positive or negative) makes for a better review:
The point of a book review isn’t to review worthy books fairly, it’s to publish good pieces. Better to assign a team of lively-but-conflicted writers to review a slew of rotten books than a gang of dullards to the most deserving releases of the season.
3. What counts as a “friend”? Romancelandia is a small world. Many bloggers are published or aspiring authors. Everyone knows everyone else, at least virtually. It would be impossible to require that reviewers have no relationship to authors they review.
For fun, here’s a litmus test from the New York Times,
Mr. Harris uses a simple test to determine whether a relationship between a potential reviewer and the author is too close: “Do you know the names of her children?” If the reviewer knows the names? “It’s not good.”
But how useful is this test when the author has pictures and names of her kids on her blog?
Is someone you’ve exchanged emails with a “friend”?
4. Maybe it affects your review for the worse, maybe it doesn’t. But we’re just hobbyists, not professional journalists, for pete’s sake. Get over yourself. Who cares?
Here’s my (provisional) take:
There are two separate, but related, issues:
(1) Should you do it?
(2) if you do it, should you disclose the relationship to the reader?
(2b) How do you know when you should disclose?
As to (1), while I have argued elsewhere for objectivity in reviews, I have never claimed that reviews can be purely objective. I agree with the Slate article: Sometimes the subjective aspects of reviews are the most important, or at least most interesting, parts. So, a blanket condemnation of the practice seems way too strong.
Actually, for my money, the most troubling objection to reviewing a friend’s book is the unfairness objection. I love to read snarky reviews, but I sometimes wonder, “Would she have written it this way if she had had drinks with the author at the RWA last summer? Or if she’s Twittering away with this author, exchanging baby care tips?” My own view is that snark should be employed in an equal opportunity manner.
I think you can write a good, helpful review of a friend’s book — indeed, you might have some really unique insights that other reviewers don’t – but should you disclose the relationship?
I think so, but why? Maybe not disclosing is a kind of lie by omission –although that seems a bit strong — but I know that if I read a glowing review, and then find out later that the writer and author are friends, I feel a bit put out.
Maybe you should disclose to avoid the appearance of a COI? I’m not sure about that either, because if blogging is not professional, then who cares of you’ve got conflict up the wazoo? Do you owe your readers anything when it’s you, your cat, and your 5 subscribers (sorry — me, my cat, and my 5 subscribers)?
The “transparency” approach is encapsulated in the penultimate paragraphs of Janine’s wonderfully thoughtful and wide ranging post in early 2008 at Dear Author on the ethical dilemmas faced by author-reviewers:
The reason I’m disclosing the fact that I aspire to be a romance author isn’t because I’ve suddenly become courageous. It’s because I have two friends who are about a month away from being published for the first time. Sherry Thomas and Meredith Duran aren’t just my friends, they are also my critique partners.
At one time, I thought that I could, if I disclosed my friendship with them, and if another reviewer offered a second opinion, review Meredith and Sherry’s books (The Duke of Shadows and Private Arrangements, respectively). But as their publication date has neared, I’ve become more uneasy with doing so. It could be argued, I think, that I have a conflict of interest, and I don’t want my actions to reflect badly on Dear Author.
And so, I have decided not to formally review Sherry or Meredith’s books, and to disclose my relationship with them so that if I comment on the reviews of their books in the comment sections, or mention that I think both Sherry and Meredith are immensely talented (as I do) you can all decide for yourselves whether or not to take what I say with a grain or more of salt. It seems to me that transparency is the best way to take an ethical approach to the situation.
I agree with Janine. I’m inclined to think transparency is the right solution, but then I wonder if there’s a problem in figuring out exactly when you have a duty to disclose.
How about if you shared a few emails with an author? Or you follow her on Twitter? Or you did have drinks with her once, but there were ten other people there and you didn’t even sit together?
My rough suggestion would be: if it occurs to you, as you prepare your review, that your relationship with the writer may be relevant, or if you find yourself thinking about it as you write, then probably you ought to mention it in the review.
Anyway, that’s what feels good to me at this typing. (Right, kitty?)
Related posts:
- Is a Book Review Just One Person’s Opinion? “Readers are the best source for why a story works” –Joey Hill Are book reviews just opinions, like a preference...
- Why this blog? I’ve been thinking a lot about what I want this blog to be. I know the blog will meet a...
- I’m Over at The Book Smugglers Today I have serious metaphysical problems with this post title, but I wanted you to know that my review of A...
- Review Irresistable Susan Mallery Cover comment: Boring, and not related to text, but easy to buy without embarrassment Setting: Contemporary Seattle, switching between a...
- Review: Romeo, Romeo, Robin Kaye Cover comment: Well… it’s better than this one. Nothing says sexy like green latex gloves! My take in brief: Despite...
- Review: Delicious, by Sherry Thomas Setting: London and environs, late Victorian Main characters: Verity Durant, chef, not a virgin, with fraught history, and Stuart Somerset,...
#1 by Ann Somerville on January 12, 2009 - 7:32 pm
This is a problem I face all the time, because I write in a genre which is incestuous beyond belief. Everyone knows every writer, reviewer, beta reader, what have you, and it operates on a strict ‘if you’re not with us, you’re agin us’ mentality. So review sites, reviewers and authors tend to form these vacuumed sealed little enclaves, and hell yes, they review their friends and people they’ve beta’d, often without declaring it.
Problem is, m/m doesn’t have many options. Those mixed sites who review it, will review it once in a very great while. There are a small handful of dedicated sites run, as I said, by cliques, so your chances of getting your stuff reviewed by the ‘enemy’ is zero. And we do tend to make friends out of writers we admire and want to promote, because quality is also a rarity. So there’s a dilemma for someone like me – if I turn down a friend and writer, someone who’s identified with me, their chances of being reviewed elsewhere is small to begin with, and further reduced by the association with the wrong clique.
So what I do is declare the interest. I try not to review stuff for which I have been the primary beta, but will declare it if I was, or a beta in any way. My concession to my friends is that I refuse to review the item if my review is going to be middling or negative. Instead, I send the item to someone else on the team. I could review the item honestly, and my friends don’t ask me to do otherwise, but my friends are few and there are many stories around. I know how even a beta effort can destroy friendships, and I don’t want to lose a friend over a review.
But it seems many sites aren’t that scrupulous. On one m/m site, the reviewers use pseuds with no indication if they’re also a writer, or who their connections are. On another, they just review all their chums glowingly and only the fact that they don’t otherwise conceal the fact of the friendships and fellow stablemate status on their blogs, do you know what’s going on.
The same question might be asked about reviewing writers from the same publisher. The same incestuousness applies to m/m epublishers too. As a matter of fact, I don’t have any friends among the m/m writers at Samhain – I pretty much loathe most of the ones I’ve had any personal dealings with, and that actually means I don’t review *those* people because I know I can’t be unbiased. I have no problem reviewing the Samhain writers I don’t know because I have zero interaction with the writers at a corporate level (I’m not even on the authors loop.)
So it’s a tricky one. I believe the only option is transparency, and to otherwise build a reputation for absolute honesty in reviews, so readers trust you, and will be inclined to give reviews of friends material more than a passing, cynical glance.
#2 by Lori on January 12, 2009 - 8:10 pm
Interesting topic. And so relevant. I have found myself only once or twice thinking that I might have softened the review because I’m “friendly” with an author. And by friendly, I mean that I comment on her blog fairly regularly, and I’m pretty sure she recognizes my name without scratching her head questioningly.
It’s one of the reasons that I actually make the concerted effort to avoid reading author blogs on a regular basis, and I don’t really belong to many loops (only one anymore). I’ve moved on from that, and have developed a set of friends independent of the online loops.
Having said that, I also try to avoid the snark when I write a review. Yes, it’s sometimes unavoidable, but I’m also fairly selective about what books I review, so if I had a true conflict, I likely wouldn’t review a completely horrid book from someone I knew and liked. But it wouldn’t stop me from emailing my friends and telling them how awful the book was!
#3 by JenB on January 12, 2009 - 8:14 pm
This isn’t much of an issue for me. I think it definitely poses a problem for blogs with a much larger readership, especially if they specialize in reviews and are considered “professional” or “semi-professional” reviewers.
I expect bias in my small circle. My reviews are rarely objective, whether or not I’ve ever spoken to an author. However, if I do review a friend’s book, I mention that the author is a friend. I’m willing to “slant” my review, just as I’m willing to read a slanted review.
So yeah, bias would probably bother me on a more public site such as Dear Author or SBTB. Even worse on a review database or from a review magazine.
But here in itty bitty blogland? Nah.
#4 by Nicola O. on January 12, 2009 - 9:59 pm
It’s funny, I hold back the snark in about 90% of the cases. I’ve been part of the “virtual world” for a long time, even if I’m a newbie to Romancelandia; I’ve met tons of people f2f that I’ve posted with for years online, and what I say online is firmly anchored in the knowledge that there are real people behind the posts, behind the books, and if I wouldn’t say it to their face, I won’t post it online.
I do occasionally snark on very well-known, very successful best-selling authors. I figure they probably have a tough hide and whatever impact one small blogger might have would be negligible.
#5 by Sybil on January 12, 2009 - 10:13 pm
I am of the mind that if you can’t say it to them you shouldn’t write it. But there is very little I wouldn’t say to anyone.
If you are worried about about what people are going to say about your book – do not publish it. If people not liking it will make you cry – don’t let people buy it. If you only want to be told your work is great give it to your mother – if your mother is nicer than mine.
And for god sake don’t read your reviews unless it is a site you know only hands out 5 stars, 5 hearts, 5 thongs and 5 kisses.
If someone is your friend and you are theirs and you expect them to lie to you and tell them your writing is golden even if it isn’t – you aren’t their friend and they aren’t yours.
So honestly I don’t see why people worry about it then again I have been told I am not a really nice person so ::shrug::. Tis your blog, do what makes you happy and fuck em if they can’t take a joke.
#6 by Maya M. on January 12, 2009 - 10:27 pm
dying of envy #1: someone has Meredith Duran and Sherry Thomas as critique partners!
dying of envy #2: someone has a cat who reads their blog!
now that that’s out of my system –
a tricky issue, and I still struggle with it. Less in terms of ‘how transparent should I be?’ and more in terms of ‘who qualifies as someone I should be transparent about?’ if I’m an aspiring author, do I owe all members of my writing group stellar reviews?
and what if someone really is a friend/friend (you know what I mean)but I’m not completely convinced of the book? should i let them see what I plan to post and refrain from posting if they don’t like it?
going (perhaps tediously) further: if I’m an aspiring writer (i.e. going to leave the ‘pure reader’ status behind) do I owe all future colleagues the professional courtesy of only mentioning books I loved? Or only mentioning the things I liked in a book and ignore (review-wise) the parts I didn’t?
I haven’t quite figured it all out. Would be great if someone (or their genius cat) came up with a few solutions.
#7 by Janine on January 12, 2009 - 11:20 pm
I’m flattered to be quoted at such length. There’s not much I can add to that blog post, which I wrote from the heart and posted with a lot of trepidation last winter.
The response was interesting; some people clearly felt that writers shouldn’t review. But then there are also people who feel that only writers are qualified to review. Those two views added together make me feel I’m entering the realm of the absurd.
I’m conginzant of the fact that reviewing might not endear me to everyone. I do try to be polite, even when giving DNF reviews, probably because I understand the writers’ side of things.
But at the same time, I do feel that as writers, it’s incumbent upon us to either grow a thick skin or at the very least, keep the sensitivity to ourselves, because having one’s book snarked is part of getting published.
I’ve been on the other side as a reader who just wanted to be able to discuss the merits of a book freely without having to worry that the author might be reading my comments and might react badly. I think we owe readers that freedom.
My personal compromise so far has been to not formally review my friends and crit partners’ books, but I have commented on their books and I did include them on my list of best 2008 reads, since I liked their books very much.
There’s a good chance that that will continue to be the case because one of the reasons I became friends with Sherry and Meredith in the first place is that we bonded over our love of the same authors (Kinsale, Ivory, Gaffney) and that similar taste often translates into their writing what I enjoy reading.
Also, if there were ever something I really didn’t like in one of their books, I would of course say so as part of my critique, and there’s a chance that the manuscript would be amended, so that the final product would be even more suited to my taste.
#8 by Janine on January 13, 2009 - 12:06 am
LOL, Maya. If that someone weren’t me, I would be dying of envy too. I just finished reading a draft of Meredith’s third book, Written on Your Skin, and boy, if people in the blogosphere liked The Duke of Shadows, I can’t wait to see what the response is to this one.
I would say absolutely not. I think you should be at least as honest in a review as you are in a critique or writing workshop, if not more so. I look at it this way: it’s like passing a student in class when they don’t know the material. Yeah, it might be hard to give out a failing grade but in the long term, pulling your punches isn’t doing them any favors. Or your site either — because readers rely on your credibility.
One of the reasons I decided to review on Dear Author (and this might sound a little pompous or self-important) was because I wanted to contribute to the growth of quality writing in the genre. I do think honest reviews do that, by getting a conversation going about what makes a strong book strong, and a weak book weak.
It’s also one of the reasons I’ve critiqued people and participated in various writing workshops and classes over the years. Sure, my #1 goal is to learn and grow as a writer, but I also have another goal, which is to help other writers learn and grow.
(For a as long as I’ve known her, Sherry Thomas, who IMO is one of the absolute best romance writers writing today, has been incredibly bright, but writing isn’t all intelligence and talent, it’s also craftsmanship and skills that are acquired over time. She has grown as a writer, and she would be the first to tell you so).
So for me, the two activities stem from the same goal, and when I feel a conflict coming on I take a step back, look into my heart, and think about this goal. And that helps orient me.
You know, I have never done that and it has never occurred to me to do that. It wouldn’t feel right to me. I think if such questions occur to you, maybe the best thing to do is to not review this person’s book, but let someone else on your blog or site (if there are other reviewers there) write the review.
What do you mean by “future colleagues”? How can you know who is a future colleague? It starts to get absurd if you let your mind go there. Pretty much anyone could be a colleague some future day. By that logic, you shouldn’t write negative reviews at all.
But if you don’t write some negative reviews, readers won’t get a good sense of your dislikes as well as your likes, and won’t be able to take that into account when reading your reviews. Also, a reviewer who writes nothing but positive reviews starts to look like a Harriet Klausner. Readers don’t feel they can rely on such a reviewer’s opinions.
That is even true of authors. I once had a book sent to me by an author whose previous book I had loved. I warned her that I couldn’t promise to love her next one, and she said something like, if you could promise to love it, your review wouldn’t mean much.
In my opinion, what you are describing is not a review. A review is something that discusses a book’s strengths and weaknesses taken together. To do less than that isn’t honest or ethical IMO. I think if you start to feel you are about to write a review in this fashion, you should stop and recuse yourself from writing it.
I hope my answers have helped. I feel a lot of sympathy for you, even if it didn’t come across in my words, because I know what it is like to be a reviewer-writer and there are so few of us out there. There used to be paperbackreader.net and when I started reviewing, HelenKay Dimon was my hero. I don’t know if I would have had the nerve to start reviewing for Dear Author if it hadn’t been for her. But they are no longer there and I really miss them.
I have given you my answers to some of your questions, but ultimately I think you need to look into your own heart for the answers. If you feel yourself getting muddled and confused, take a step back and think about what it is you ultimately want to see happen, and whether what you are serving the greater good.
For me, I ultimately want to see the genre grow and thrive and strengthen. I think about that all the time, and about how I can contribute to that, both as a writer and as a reviewer.
To be brutally honest about it, I’ve been reading romances for over a quarter century and while I’ve read some great books in that time, I’ve also read a lot of books I couldn’t finish, or that I felt cheated of the hours I spent reading them after I finished them. I don’t want to feel that way, and I don’t want other readers to feel that way. So I feel a responsibility to be honest as a reviewer.
Yesterday I wrote a review (it will be running Wed. the 21st), and I kept wondering if I was grading the book too harshly or too generously. Then I realized that it’s at the point where I’m wondering if my grade should go up or it it should go down, that it probably means the grade is exactly where it needs to be.
So that’s my long winded way of saying: the confusion and the ethical dilemmas won’t necessarily go away, but over time and with practice, you can get to know how your moral compass works, and how to listen to it.
#9 by Kate on January 13, 2009 - 1:36 am
This is a really interesting post, and a really interesting thread. Thanks for having it.
For me, with a small blog with no real connections anywhere, I’ve thought a thousand times that all I have is my integrity, and if I’m planning on keeping any sort of regular readers (the seven of them), I count on my honesty and integrity as sort of an unspoken contract: folks read my reviews, and they may not like or agree with them, but hopefully they know that it’s an honest review. I’m not a big name. I don’t do this for a living. My integrity is all I’ve got in the blogosphere.
I wouldn’t hesitate to hand out a bad review to a book that others love – I’ve done it before – and by extension if I’m reviewing a book by an author I know (and mind you, I only know one published author) I feel like I should give out an honest review, regardless of personal connections. But I will add that I would hesitate to review a book by someone I knew well, simply for the fact that if the book were bad I’d hate to give it a negative review – and with my need for honesty and integrity, I’d have to do so. If I’m going to stick around, I should probably develop tougher skin. But again – this isn’t my living, and I’m fortunate (?) to only know one published author.
I often think about the honesty of reviews in regards to publishers sending out ARCs, which isn’t necessarily the topic here but something that I feel pertains slightly. There are a lot of “review” sites out there that aren’t worth their salt and exist merely for the praising of ARCs that they’re fortunate enough to receive. The very few ARCs I’ve been contacted to review, I always email the person politely to let them know that I’m happy to review it but that I pride myself on honest reviews, and if they don’t want to risk a negative review then they shouldn’t send it. I’ve actually told one publisher before that my reviewing one of their novels was a conflict of interest (long story) and turned them down. Sometimes I feel that receiving an ARC can be a conflict of interest to some reviewers who let their gratitude for the free book cloud their judgment. But that’s neither here nor there, I suppose.
There’s no real black-or-white. I think the best thing that any reviewer can do is be as transparent as possible, and participate in reviewing to whatever extent they feel is appropriate to their abilities. But if there’s a personal interest in a person’s review, it should be disclosed.
#10 by Mistress on January 13, 2009 - 4:58 am
Kate wrote:
Amen Kate, I feel the same. I treasure the comradery I’ve found in Romancelandia but if it takes contrived reviews to remain in their good opinion; I’ll survive without.
My bff is finishing a Fantasy manuscript, that he assumes will be reviewed on my site; but he assumes wrong. He’s a doll, but is quite sensitive. He goes on the offensive if I innocently question a plot aspect; there’s no way he could handle being reviewed on my blog or any other I frequent. When the time comes I’ll send him in the direction of the auto ARC squeeing blogs first and then the blogs I respect; when he’s had his ego sucked and is ready to grow as a writer/ get authentic opinions.
IMO snark is the most earnest form of expression; it’s how we process the world moment to moment. When you’re reading a LKH novel and Merry has sex with (in essence) a child; is your immediate response A) ” ewww!! That’s just wrong” or B) Full of exciting unconventional intimacy not for the faint of heart.
On the snark front, pulling punches is not in my nature. If I ran into Jenna Black at a convention, (whose novels I’ve slammed twice) would I make fun of her outfit and pull her hair? No. But If I (some how) ended up attending a panel she’s heading discussing her Devil series… she’d have some serious splainin’ to do. I don’t have bestselling author awestruck syndrome nor do I feel my favorite authors can do no wrong ( a disgrace to fan girls everywhere, I know lol).
I think every book reviewed is a test of our merit as bloggers. We can’t claim to love books, and then with biased praise add to the creation of more trash (which is the result of slanted reviews). But when it comes down to it our blog fans have their own set expectations of the content of our blogs, staying true to them/ and ourselves takes priority.
So:
If your blog is super nice in tone about everything, then one more “this is the best book ever” review (even if a friends novel) isn’t selling your soul; any more or less then you already do.
If your blog strives to be objective (even if highly opinionated), then omitting the relationship with an author or publisher/glazing over the weaknesses and only highlighting the strengths of any novel; is plain dishonest.
Kate wrote:
Sometimes I feel that receiving an ARC can be a conflict of interest to some reviewers who let their gratitude for the free book cloud their judgment. But that’s neither here nor there, I suppose.
There’s no real black-or-white. I think the best thing that any reviewer can do is be as transparent as possible, and participate in reviewing to whatever extent they feel is appropriate to their abilities. But if there’s a personal interest in a person’s review, it should be disclosed.
I stopped following many a blog based on how they reviewed every novel with the tinkle of bells and sneezing glitter. They lost my respect franticly urging others to spend their hard earned dinero on really bad books/ or the extremely mediocre because of questionable motives. You always have to account for differing preferences of course, but these cases just reeked of horse crap.
I’m torn on the (whether or not to accept) ARCs issue myself. I wonder if overtime I’ll cave into the pressure of publisher/author expectations. There’s something about preordering a book at the inflated hardcover price, rushing out to the book store on release day, & carrying it home psyched. When the result of all that is Meh themed badly edited Fluff my soul screams its anguish; and the review that follows is objective, but pulls no punches. I worry that level of blunt honesty might be lost if I wasn’t paying for the books, that if it was sent to me for free… maybe the quality or lack there of wouldn’t matter to me as intensely. On the other hand I like the idea of: being exposed to books in my chosen genres I may not have read, of getting a crack at choice titles before their release date, and bringing my blog followers deeper into the book underworld by getting them to interact with the authors on the blog through interviews and fun contests. Currently I’ve decided too not accept them for now, but in a few years who knows.
That’s not to say that, it’s impossible for a blog to accept ARCs and review them fairly. I frequent quite a few, but IMHO they’re the exception not the rule.
#11 by Laura Vivanco on January 13, 2009 - 5:09 am
A review is something that discusses a book’s strengths and weaknesses taken together. To do less than that isn’t honest or ethical IMO. I think if you start to feel you are about to write a review in this fashion, you should stop and recuse yourself from writing it.
I’ve never written a review, partly because if I tried to, my posts would be even longer than they have been. I pick out one (or possibly more) aspects of the book which interest me and about which I have something to say. It’s worked for me as a method, and I commented on two books written by other people connected with TMT. As far as I can remember, I’ve usually stated that what I was writing wasn’t a review, and I think it was fairly obvious from the contents that what I’d written weren’t reviews.
That said, I’m not sure this method would work for you, Jessica, since the title of your site includes the word “reviews.” Then again, not all your posts are reviews, so maybe you could post that kind of non-review response to a novel from time to time.
As far as writing reviews is concerned, I’d be more worried about the impact on my friendship than the impact on the possible readers. That may sound selfish and unethical, but the fact is that I’ve yet to come across any reviewer whose reviews will reliably indicate to me that I’ll enjoy the book. Reading preferences just seem to be too personal for that to be the case. Tumperkin wrote about this recently:
Every romance story has a sort of shape. Proportions. And a pace. There is no ‘one size fits all’ for romance readers. We all favour different combinations. [...] It’s as though my personal romance preferences form a little jigsaw shaped piece and every time I read a book, it’s like I’m trying it against that little shape. Does it fit? Sometimes, it really doesn’t fit. Sometimes, it’s so close, but not quite there. Occasionally, fleetingly, magic happens.
The magic does not often coincide with that very excellent prose.
Sometimes, it does.
To conclude, then, if I did review (which I don’t), and if a friend of mine had written a novel, I’d only review it if I liked it, and I’d mention my connection with the author. If I didn’t like it, I’d not review it because I wouldn’t want to damage the friendship. As I said, the reasons why someone might not enjoy a book can be very personal and have nothing to do with the quality of the writing. As long as you don’t have lots of friends who are authors, I don’t think this would tip the balance of the site towards the “if you don’t have something positive to say, don’t say anything” side of things. And as long as there are other books (both ones you’ve enjoyed and ones you haven’t) which you have read but not reviewed, your author friend shouldn’t be able to assume that if you haven’t reviewed her book it’s an indication that you disliked it.
#12 by katiebabs on January 13, 2009 - 8:34 am
As I become friendlier with more authors, I have found myself in this position. As long as you critique the writing and not the person, that is what matters.
I hope if I was friend with an author they would respect my opinion and I would respect them. I would try not to be bias. Sorry, I just can’t.
And why would they not want me to point out both the good and bad equally? An perfect example is, what if my friend was wearing a horrible outfit and wanted my opinion? I would be honest and tell her to find something better, and perhaps help her pick the best one. Just like with their writing, I hope my views and opinions would help them be the best writer they can be.
#13 by Victoria Janssen on January 13, 2009 - 8:56 am
In writing ethnography, disclosure has become the accepted practice–so when an ethnographer/anthropologist is writing about a particular culture, the reader knows their relationship to that culture, whether it’s “I grew up here” or “I went here with my graduate advisor and lived here for six months.” The relationship, in that discipline, is very relevant to the stance they take, and their point of view. I think disclosure is helpful in reviews, too.
So far as the “small community” of romancelandia goes, I think that is an issue that should be considered on all sides, as humans tend to feel a sense of community when there’s opportunity. The smallness of the community can lead one to feel one’s closer to one’s fellow romancelandians than is actually the case, or more distant from them than is actually the case. Disclosure helps to alleviate this problem.
#14 by Maya M. on January 13, 2009 - 10:35 am
@Janine –
thanks, J. You’ve clearly put much more thought into this than I and it shows.
#15 by MoJo on January 13, 2009 - 2:49 pm
Laura said:
That.
And I’ve become nicely acquainted with a couple of authors I’ve reviewed *after* I did so. One of them wasn’t such a nice review, but the author was so gracious both publicly and privately that I grew to really like her. That must happen around here (Romancelandia) more often than not.
#16 by Tumperkin on January 13, 2009 - 5:17 pm
Oh dear. I just lost my comment – which, naturally, was incredibly erudite and much better than this replacement in my fond memory.
I agree with some of the other commenters in that I don’t think there is one set of ethical standards that applies to all romance blogger sites. Blogs vary from the likes of Dear Author which I would expect to maintain high ethical standards to the much more amateur sites that are really about readers expressing unapologetically subjective views.
I think bloggers have a sort of ‘contract’ with their readers. I expect a thorough, professional review from DA and I know that I might get that from one of a number of people who all review for DA. On other blogs I expect something much more subjective and I will often be well aware of the blogger’s preferences and triggers and will judge their reviews accordingly. Part of that ‘judgement’ by me will be a recognition that the process of blogging may mean that the blogger in question knows lots of authors, particularly where they blog in niche areas such as M/M romance as mentioned by one the commenters above. I suspect many bloggers ‘end up’ having online friendships (for want of a better word) with authors who have responded to a review and then kept visiting. That can put the blogger in a difficult position if they don’t like the next release (and to my mind is something that authors should be as aware of as the blogger).
You posed the question of ‘when is friendship friendship’ – I think that is my concern about this issue of ‘disclosure’: where do you draw the line? When is judgement affected? For some people it might just be when someone visits their blog, for others they’d have to meet them before that would occur, for others their judgement wouldn’t be affected by casual friendships. For me, I think the ‘names of the author’s children’ rule looks to be a pretty good one. But I’m with Laura : if a friend asked me to review their book and I didn’t like it, I’d simply decline. In fact, I might well decline even if I did like it because of how I consider it might be perceived (e.g. if we visit each other’s blogs a lot or have collaborated on something). That’s one of the benefits of being an enthusiastic amateur: I can choose what to blog about.
#17 by Jessica on January 14, 2009 - 6:34 am
Just popping in to thank everyone for their comments. Hopefully this evening I can post a longer reply.
#18 by Janine on January 14, 2009 - 1:41 pm
I always find these types of comments interesting. I take it as a compliment that so many readers view Dear Author in a different light and expect us to maintain high ethical standards. We try to do that because we care about ethics.
But when Jane and Jayne started Dear Author in the spring of 2006, I don’t believe they thought they were starting anything more than an amateur site for expressing their unapologetically subjective views.
I know that Jane has said more than once she only started Dear Author for herself and a few friends. That it grew into more than that is a tribute to Jane and Jayne’s creativity and ability to articulate their likes and dislikes in a perceptive and entertaining way.
So, while it may be true that not all blogs are equal, or should be held to equal standards, I think the line between the “amateur” blog and blog that is considered something other than “amateur” is a lot more blurry than many people realize.
#19 by Tumperkin on January 14, 2009 - 2:50 pm
Janine – yes, I do think DA is very professional – but it’s not just that characteristic that factors into my expectations. For example, I would ‘expect’ (in the sense of ‘anticipate’ rather than ‘demand’) Jessica to maintain more stringent ethical standards because of the sorts of things I’ve read in this blog in the past.
#20 by Jessica on January 14, 2009 - 10:05 pm
Ann Somerville wrote:
You know, my husband was just saying the same thing about his area of history: they all know each other, so there’s no way to avoid the issue. It sounds like you have developed a coherent set of rules for keeping both your integrity and your friendships intact.
The point about negative bias is just the flip side of this issue: I wanted to stick to friendships in this post, but I could easily have asked whether you should review folks you are biased AGAINST as FOR. I thought it interesting that the Slate article I quote says “YES, makes for an interesting review.”
Either way, I am with you on transparency.
Lori wrote:
I know that I would be affected in the same way, and I usually try to avoid commenting on author blogs as well, or even reading them.
Nicola O. wrote:
I agree with both points, although, like you, I can’t always hold back the snark.
Sybil wrote:
I like all of these points, especially the one about friendship requiring honesty. although … my honesty to friends is not usually blunt or snarky if it’s something negative about them or their lives — the content is there, but the style is very different.
Maya M. wrote:
Yes, the cat (one of them) loves the blog, especially the sitting on the warm keyboard and the batting of the typing fingers.
You raise an interesting question: it might not only not be WRONG to give only glowing reviews to friends, it might be your OBLIGATION to do it.
Kate wrote:
I’m in the same blogging boat, and I agree with you. On the question of some of these review sites (the “5 thong” sites as Sybil mentioned), I agree they are not for readers — they are part of the publishing machine, the promotional machine and do not have my interests as a consumer in mind. It’s another issue whether receiving ARCs alone distinguishes these kinds of promotional sites from real review sites –I think not — but certainly it’s worth thinking about.
Mistress wrote:
I agree with you — these fake reviews do nothing for the genre. On the ARC question, since two of you brought it up, maybe I’ll post on it, I thought I was the only blogger who didn’t accept them — typical egocentric me. (And good luck with your friend!)
Laura Vivanco wrote:
Yes, damn the title of this blog. If only I had known how it would brand it, I would have called it something else.
I agree with you that friendship is more important than reviews, but there are a few ways of doing that. One is to write dishonest reviews when necessary, two, refuse to review friends (or only review their good books), or three, only make friends with thick skinned or fairminded people (Katiebabs’ and Sybil’s approach).
Like you and Mojo, I also have yet to find a reviewer whose opinions track mine, but I’m not sure that’s why I read reviews. Is it why you read them? Have to think more about that one.
Victoria Janssen wrote:
I agree that the feeling of closeness online can be very misleading — one of the reasons I asked whom you consider a “friend”. I actually sort of don’t want to meet any of my regular blog pals in RL because I like them so much online and I’m afraid we wouldn’t hit it off at all.
Janine wrote:
Janine — thanks for your contributions here and your thoughtful response to Maya’s equally thoughtful questions, I don’t think it’s self-important or pompous at all. If intelligent well-written reviews are getting written, the genre must have something to offer.
And I agree that we need to listen to our intuition, or conscience or whatever we’re feeling as it provides a good sign that we are too close to someone to write an objective review. Perhaps using Laura’s strategy would work in those cases, or calling ti something else, or acknowledging the bias (as I did in my non-review of Megan Hart’s Dirty).
Tumperkin wrote:
Amen to that, sister!
But you raise an interesting question, and I agree with you that I have different expectations of different sites. What it means to uphold the “contract” as you refer to it will be different from blog to blog.
As Janine says, DA is still an amateur blog — they all have day jobs as far as I know and Jane has not yet started selling DA t-shirts. On the other hand, I think it is the one everyone reads, and is influential in some ways, and with more power, as Spiderman knows, comes more responsibility.
I haven’t done justice to all of these comments, which have been so helpful to me, and, even better, given me at least three ideas for new things to post about! Thank you!
#21 by Lady of the Review on January 15, 2009 - 1:29 am
I’m of the opinion that if you’re a reviewer and that is what you set out to do, you should do it the same for all the books you review, even if it’s for an author you love or one you know.
I’ve only been reviewing for about a year and have become friendly with authors thru my reviews, but I’m always upfront about the fact that I am going to review a book truthfully. It’s going to have both the good and the bad.
If a reviewer can’t be objective, then they have no business reviewing, especially if they’re wanting to be considered “serious” reviewers (if that makes sense).
Just my two cents.
#22 by Laura Vivanco on January 15, 2009 - 5:07 am
If a reviewer can’t be objective, then they have no business reviewing, especially if they’re wanting to be considered “serious” reviewers
I have the impression that DA is a review site, AAR is a review site and there are others. What’s posted there is mainly reviews (with a bit of industry news, polls etc).
A lot of other places feel like romance blogs, written by romance bloggers who may well not think of themselves as “‘serious’ reviewers.” Their remit can be to review themes/issues in the genre, and they sometimes do that through writing a book review, but their main focus isn’t on writing lots of reviews of individual books, even if they do produce quite a lot of reviews.
I’m not sure I’ve explained that well, but it’s hard to define because these blogs/sites haven’t made that distinction themselves so I’m just expressing a general impression that I have of them.
Like you and Mojo, I also have yet to find a reviewer whose opinions track mine, but I’m not sure that’s why I read reviews. Is it why you read them?
If someone writes a not-really-a-review sort of post I’ll enjoy reading that for the analysis, but in general when I read something that looks like a review I do so in the hope that I’ll find recommendations for books I’d enjoy reading and which I’d like to buy. Isn’t that the ostensible purpose of a review?
Unfortunately, so far I only seem to have found a few reviewers whose favourites are ones I know to steer well clear of, because they’ll undoubtedly leave me traumatised
With most other reviewers it’s very hit and miss and usually I don’t buy books based on their reviews. Part of the problem is that if I want to buy single-titles, I’d probably have to buy them without being able to browse in a shop first. I could browse the selection of Mills & Boons, because those are available in one shop near me, but M&Bs don’t get reviewed on romance sites so often. And with some of the lines I still have the same problem as with the single-titles, because the lines aren’t published in the UK.
#23 by Jessica on January 15, 2009 - 6:51 am
Laura Vivanco wrote:
Yes, you’re right — the reviewers’ take on the book, and her opinion of it, matter, but there may be things in the review that lead me to read a book even if the reviewer did not care for it. My decision to read the book is, in a sense, “based on the review”, because the review brought the existence of the book to my attention and gave me information about it that piqued my interest. It’s nice if the reviewer ALSO really liked the book, but not necessary.
Plus, in an OT note … since I started this blog I haven’t been reading many reviews of books I haven’t read. I find it is really hard to find good reviews — reviews that are comprehensive without being so detailed (with or without spoilers) that they effectively ruin the book for me. I think AAR and TRR probably have the best reviews in this sense, but they often don’t review the books I want to read. DA reviews are fantastic but often too spoilerish/detailed for me. I love to read them AFTER I’ve read the book.
#24 by Ann Somerville on January 15, 2009 - 6:59 am
I find it is really hard to find good reviews — reviews that are comprehensive without being so detailed (with or without spoilers) that they effectively ruin the book for me.
At Uniquely Pleasurable, the guidelines I give our team is never to reveal more of the plot than the book’s blurb does. Of course, you get people who whinge about a review mentioning that the couple in question end up together, but if you’re reviewing romance, that’s kind of a given.
If a reviewer can’t be objective, then they have no business reviewing
There is no such thing as an objective reviewer. There are only reviewers who do or do not own up to their biases. A consumer review of a literary work must include a subjective judgement, or it’s not doing its job. Even academic reviews only offer an illusion of objectivity.
#25 by Laura Vivanco on January 15, 2009 - 7:56 am
I find it is really hard to find good reviews — reviews that are comprehensive without being so detailed (with or without spoilers) that they effectively ruin the book for me.
I wonder if this isn’t much of a problem for me because (a) I sometimes read the ends of romances anyway, to find out what’s going to happen (other than the happy ending, which is a given) and (b) I don’t read romances for their plots. It’s the characterisation which really engages my interest, and that’s not something that can be “spoilered” because I build up my impression of the characters over the course of the book. That said, if the review revealed that the hero or heroine did something I find morally repugnant or just yucky, I might be put off reading the book altogether, but that’s different, I think, from getting the book and feeling the experience has been spoiled by knowing a plot turn in advance.