Or why I don’t accept ARCs, how Romanceland is like rural America, and why fans and academics aren’t so different after all.
When I started this blog, in August 2008, I became aware of overlapping relationships and complex identities in Romanceland. One blogger reviews romances, but she’s also a good friend of several authors she reviews. Another blogger is very close to an editor. A third is trying to break into romance writing, and she’s come to know and rely on the friendly feedback of authors in her critique group or chapter of RWA. Others are hoping to gain paid work as editors, graphic designers, publicists, experts, etc. Twittering has blurred lines even more.
This really surprised me, at first. I joke sometimes that I am the only blogger around who does not have a WIP, and I only half think it’s a joke. But after I wrote my post on how atypical the bloggers in Romanceland are compared to the average romance reader, I realized that it’s not everyone who reads romance who wants to turn their hobby into something more, but the group of people I have found online who are, like me, unusually interested in and dedicated to romance. The fans, as it were.
Then it hit me, that just as Romanceland represents a really small segment of romance readers (and writers and editors, really), it’s more like a small town than a big city (Even the largest blogs have a small fraction of the traffic that specialty blogs in my tiny academic discipline get. Then compare them to the biggies like Huff Post or the Onion, and you can see what I mean.). As in a small town rural setting, overlapping relationships are impossible to avoid. You are a dentist, and your patient is on your son’s soccer team, which you coach. The patient’s mother is your daughter’s kindergarten teacher. Your house cleaner cleans your colleague’s house and says something indiscreet about their clutter before you can stop her. Your gynecologist is in your circle of friends, and you work with her husband. Add the size of Romanceland to the devotion of the fans, and there’s no way to avoid the complex relationships that characterize it.
I’ve always seen this as both a strength and a potential challenge. First, even when we disagree, we all share something, which is a love of the genre. The engaging, supportive community aspect is wonderful. It’s also an incredible strength to have connections that allow bloggers to communicate cutting edge or insider information from publishers, editors, and authors. Those relationships provide a wealth of knowledge that I, as a mere reader, could never have. But overlapping relationships can also create conflicts of interest. As the recent spate of articles about bias in reviews suggests, the challenge to remain objective (however you define it) is always there. It’s not that there’s any overt conspiracy, but if you develop close relationships with certain authors or editors, I’m guessing you would be inclined to share their views on some things, like competing presses or competing authors. I know that I personally try as far as possible to empathize with my friends and to see the world the way they do, if only for the purpose of figuring out where they are coming from. This doesn’t always lead to agreement, but it often does.
For this reason, my own view, at least for now, is that it’s not enough to have transparency in blogging (to disclose relationships), although that’s all to the good. I think we need, in addition, lots of bloggers who don’t have these connections. After trying it out, I decided early on not to accept ARCs, to put countdown release widgets on my sidebar, do author interviews, to accept advertising, or do other promotional blogging. At the time, I thought it a joke that anyone would want me to do those things, but, as anyone reading this likely knows, you don’t need many hits to draw attention. To be honest, a major reason for my policy has been selfishness: I found that ARCs forced me to read books someone else chose on someone else’s schedule, and blog about them according to some publicist’s timeline. But another reason was my desire to stay on the “reader” side of things. I just don’t want my romance reading and blogging to become part of the machine, in an inchoate sense I cannot even clarify to myself.
Of course, when I publish a review with a link to Amazon, or have a Library Thing widget I AM part of the publicity machine. But I employ the doctrine of double effect to defend myself: I read the book and blogged about the book because I wanted to. If doing so had the unintended but foreseen effect of publicizing it, c’est la vie.
I also hasten to add that I don’t see anything wrong with the many other bloggers who participate in this way with the industry, and my policy is not meant as a criticism of theirs. As I wrote above, these close relationships provide something important and valuable. I enjoy reading your author interviews and entering your contests (as I type this, I am hoping to win a Maya Banks book from Book Binge). It’s just not for me.
Or is it?
(Yeah, just when you thought I was winding down, I get a second wind! If only this happened on the treadmill!)
I don’t have a fiction WIP, but I sure as hell have some nonfiction WIPs related to romance. I may prefer to think of that work as “research”, very different from the kind of fan writings typical of bloggers, but even I, with my large ego and overweening sense of academic superiority, know this is a crock of shit. This came to me as I was looking at Sarah Frantz’s draft of a mission statement for the professional romance research group she and the others at TMT are organizing. I wanted her to delete the requirement that members be “lovers of romance”. To me, that made it sound like you had to be a fan. But fans and academics are two different things. Right?
Because fans read a lot of romance. And fans know a lot about their subject, almost obsessively so. And fans have a good sense of the history of their subject and what’s been written before they came along. And fans read everything everyone else writes about their subject. And fans have a very definite opinion about who gets it “right” in fandom and who gets it “wrong”. And in fandom, there are the places to write that are legit and the places that are not. And fandom expels people for bad behavior.
And … this sounds exactly like academia, doesn’t it? (I’ve been reading Matt Hills on this topic this week). I’m not exactly in some special category just because my “extramural” connection is academic.
So, while I started this post thinking we need both connected bloggers and unconnected bloggers (me being one of the later group), I end it thinking we just need bloggers with all different types of connections. This is a tentative conclusion, but it’s the only one I have today.
Related posts:
- HaMPO: Help A Moral Philosopher Out: Live Blogging An Academic Conference, Ethics of Welcome to my new feature, HaMPO, in which someone who has a PhD and 10 years professional experience in her...
- Interview With A Croatian Feminist, Anarchist, Speculative Fiction Writer, and Avid Genre Fiction Reader Milena Benini, a regular reader of this blog, won my last contest. When I realized I had to send her...
- Academic Talks on Nora Roberts, Mary Stewart, Laura Kinsale, and Grace Livingston Hill More summaries from the April 2009 Pop Culture Association Conference, this time a romance panel featuring some of the bloggers...
- If Romance Novels are Neither High Culture nor Pop Culture, What the Hell Are They? In which the dismissal of romance gets personal. After the Popular Culture Association meeting in April, I approached editors for...
- Are You Smarter Than A Romance Reader? So, you want to read some historical romance? You’ll have to take this qualifying exam. To get the most...
- Signs I was Destined to Become a Romance Reader Recently I rewatched a couple of beloved older movies through the lens of being a relatively new, but avid, romance...
#1 by Keishon on March 29, 2009 - 8:09 am
It does seem like almost everyone is an aspiring writer or a writer in these circles today. I’m not put off by it, just surprised. I have zero interest in being a writer. I do love to promote authors whose work I’ve enjoyed and have been doing that for years and I purposely keep myself distant from authors online. I don’t want to write my thoughts down fearing the author is looking over my shoulder because I’m a reader who can like your one book today and turn on you and hate your next book tomorrow. Yeah, it wouldn’t be a healthy relationship.
#2 by Sarah Frantz on March 29, 2009 - 9:26 am
I don’t think I’ve ever felt both validated and yet incredibly defensive when reading a blog before. Congratulations!
And yes, I was reading your description of fandom and going, “This is different from academia….how?” Because not so different at all. I think it’s a matter of training. I’m trained as a literary critic. So I’m incapable of reading or writing something without it coloring everything I do.
Despite my bio on DA, I’m not really an aspiring writer. If I had world enough and time, yes, I’d do it, but plot bunnies don’t seem to reside in my brain. I’m good with a turn of phrase, but not so great with actually having a plot or having particularly good characterization. I’d much rather read and write about what other people produce.
I sometimes wonder what academics (well, literary critics) would be like if any of their subjects were still alive. I know the Jane Austen crowd sometimes bleeds into uncomfortably fan-grrlish behavior. I’m sure there’s literary criticism of some still-alive writers (Toni Morrison immediately jumps to mind) and I’d be interested in knowing what relationship the critics have with the authors.
Interesting thoughts!
#3 by Victoria Janssen on March 29, 2009 - 9:36 am
One thing I’ve learned from years in sf/f and in media fandom, is that though there IS a community, everybody is not friends. Not everyone has the same agenda–they might have wildly different reasons for participating in a fandom. Diversity makes it real.
#4 by Laura Vivanco on March 29, 2009 - 9:51 am
I think we need, in addition, lots of bloggers who don’t have these connections.
That would be tricky. Blogs tend to allow comments. All it would take would be for a blogger to respond to comments from an author or editor, and the blogger would fall out of the “bloggers who don’t have these connections” category. Or am I defining “connection” too loosely?
I wanted her to delete the requirement that members be “lovers of romance”. To me, that made it sound like you had to be a fan.
Yes, and it would have excluded the potentially valuable viewpoints of people who are critical of the genre.
It also made me uncomfortable because I’m a bit cautious about where I bestow my affections. I don’t embrace the entire genre, never mind allow it to become my lover. I have cordial relationships with many individual romances, but I have become truly intimate with only a very, very few.
#5 by azteclady on March 29, 2009 - 9:55 am
I am one of those rara avis who has no desire to write or be published. (Well, other than blogs and comments therein.)
It is interesting, isn’t it, just how complicated it can be too keep one’s different ties with people separate?
I like the online persona’s of a number of authors and enjoy interacting with them. Sometimes I also enjoy their writing, sometimes I don’t–and I am very aware that, in the latter cases, I struggle more when reviewing.
In the end, though, since the purpose of my reviews is to give other readers a glimpse into my own reading experience to help them make a more informed decision to buy and/or read a particular book, I can only be honest to my reaction and reading experience–regardless of my feelings for the person behind the story, and regardless of how I came to get the book.
#6 by katiebabs on March 29, 2009 - 11:17 am
I have always wanted to be a published ever since I wrote my first short story when I was 13. Blogging has enabled me to work on my craft. It has taken me 3 years to finally ask people for feedback and send out my work to agents and publishers. If I never found this on-line community I would have never gained the confidence I have now.
The downside is, if and when I ever get published, reviewing will be pushed to the side. One blogging buddy I have began her blog in 2007, and from her reviewing and blogging, decided for the first time to write a story and become publisher. She is now published and feels such guilt because she doesn’t have the time to blog and review.
I told her, you have to sacrifice one thing for another.
If you think about it, aren’t bloggers writers? Blogging and reviewing is an outlet.
#7 by Nicola O. on March 29, 2009 - 12:36 pm
A long time ago, I had aspirations to authorhood. Mostly because I love to read so much, it seemed the natural profession — right? The problem is, writing is WAY MORE WORK than reading is. WAY more.
I labored off and on for 5 years on an American 18th century historical. I used my p/t MBA student status to get me into the Regenstein stacks to research the period. I spent a vacation on-locale, shooting several rolls of film in relevant museums to have visual references. I belonged to an awesome critique group.
As it turns out, I actually like the critiquing, and I’m not such a bad writer, which ultimate is how I ended up blogging, I suppose. But I’m really not much of a storyteller. I ended up with about 100 pages of earnestly-researched… uh, fiction, I guess, would be the word… but no story. That’s when I decided that I’d stick to reading.
So count me among the romance bloggers who are not working on a romance book.
But I do like to get ARCs, and I’m happy to promote authors whose books I love. Whatever relationships I have with authors have resulted from me loving their work and sending them fanmail, so as yet there are no conflicts.
#8 by Kate on March 29, 2009 - 2:18 pm
A really thought-provoking post, Jessica – well done!
When I first started blogging, I was eager to receive ARCs, mostly because 1. free books (I’m not made of money, as my ma would say) and 2. it seemed somehow a mark of note, as in my blog was popular enough or well-written enough to garner this sort of attention. It was pretty high school of me, I suppose. Now that I receive the occasional ARC from everyone from large publishers to tiny self-publications, I’m growing a bit more uncomfortable about it, as in it seems as if just because I’ve received this free book, I should be so grateful that I’ll review it with a bias. Of course I don’t do this – and I make a point of letting publishers know that I will review the book honestly, whether good or bad – but the feeling I sometimes get is that I should be so grateful that I’ve been given a free book ahead of the general public that I should review it favorably.
This does not sit well with me. I suppose that I have the luxury of being a tiny blog that almost no one reads – let’s be honest – but the ethics of reviewing are important to me, as in, I may not have readers but I have my sense of right and wrong! (Ok, I’m being a little hard on myself today. It’s raining.) As much as I started out wishing to cultivate relationships with publishers and authors, I’ve almost gone in the opposite direction of not wanting those relationships as to not taint my ability to fairly review. I’m not saying I would ever turn down overtures, since it is a very small world and I’m not out to make not-friends, I think I’ve just become more protective of my reputation as a reviewer, for whatever that means to my eight loyal readers. I also like to believe that even if I had established relationships with the industry, I would review fairly.
I am also one of those really prevalent reviewers out there who has a WIP (actually one completed and two in progress), but I don’t think I’ve particularly let that color my opinions on reviewing or the industry. However, I’m not trying particularly hard to get my work “out there” at this stage in my life. Actually I’m just sitting on all of them entirely, so I almost see that part of my writing entirely separate from my reviewing.
#9 by Kate on March 29, 2009 - 2:22 pm
(Oh, and by the way, I really love the comparison of Romancelandia to rural America. I spent most of dinner last night discussing my deep connections to southern Indiana, and you’re spot on with the analogy.)
#10 by Tumperkin on March 29, 2009 - 3:17 pm
Great post and great comments. I love the small town analogy – I think you’ve really hit on something there.
One area where I sort of disagree, is this sense I get from your post that there is a, I don’t know – purpose? end? – to this blogging lark. When I read the bit about the variety of connections being both a strength and a challenge, I immediately thought ’strength to what end? Challenge to what?’.
I think this is a reaction I have a lot. It struck me recently when I read a post of Robin’s at DA about rules/blogging and again now. I suppose I see blogging an individual endeavour rather than a collective one. Yes, we have connections; yes, we have exchange views and link and introduce others; yes we have common interests and bounce off each other. But does that mish-mash of individual experiences amount to any more than that? And if not, why worry about strengths or weaknesses?
As you know, I posted yesterday about the perennial topic of ‘why blog?’. On looking at that post again, it strikes me how self-related all of the various questions I posed there are (it’s all ‘me’ not ‘us’). I suppose it’s pretty obvious from that that I don’t partcularly see this blogging thing as a collective endeavour. That’s not to say that I’m all ‘me, myself and I’ about it. I do believe there’s a community here although I can’t type the word ‘community’ without wrinkling my nose derisively. In fact, I prefer your small town analogy. It strikes me as more accurate. Because this isn’t some sort of commune that I’ve entered, signing up to a set of rules and behaviours and common goals. It’s more like moving into a small, thriving town and setting up shop; wondering if anyone will look in the window.
#11 by KristieJ on March 29, 2009 - 3:20 pm
Interesting topic!!
While I have aspirations to write – they are in the VERY far distant future and they DON’T include writing romance – odd as that sounds coming from the dedicated fan that I am.
And so far in all the years I’ve been blogging, I have only accepted two books from authors – the first one being Broken Wing – and we know how that turned out *g* and the second one I’m reading now. But I am still VERY hesitant to accept ARC’s. I don’t want that sense of obligation I would feel to not only read them – but like them. I do get regular ARC’s from one particular publisher – but as this publisher’s books are only very rarely stocked on the bookshelves here that’s a horse of a different colour.
I don’t enter a lot of contests – the Smooth Talking Stranger joint contest at DA and SB’s being an exception (and look at how that turned out – I. DID. NOT. WIN. A. BOOK. – heh heh heh heh). I only enter for books I really want to read. As for becoming friendly with authors — that’s a tough one for me. A few have slipped passed the author/reader barrier and for that I am truly grateful, but on the whole, while I admire their talent tremendously, I prefer to keep at least a shear curtain between because of the very fact I don’t want a conflict of interest. I am totally on the readers side – cause that’s what I am first and foremost.
#12 by ReacherFan on March 29, 2009 - 3:42 pm
It’s really not that unusual for any ‘community’ on or off-line to have apparent conflicts of interest. I’ve been a member and officer in ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials), the world’s largest consensus standards group with over 30,000 members, but standards get written by a handful of people who have a specific interest and experience. A rural community in a worldwide network. I have watched people sit and argue the ‘company line’, but for the most part members would walk into a task and do what they thought was technically correct regardless of their company’s view.
In my work as an expert witness, there is an obligation to disclose all past work and current ties, especially any financial ties that might prevent me from having an unbiased opinion or predispose me to lend more credibility one way or another. It does not mean I would, just that the court needs to be aware of it. How much do I need to disclose when I do a book review? Well, certainly if I had a fiduciary interest or personal attachment, I would think disclosure is in the best interest of all. It maintains the reviewer’s credibility and allows the reader an opportunity to weigh the it in when reading the review. Otherwise, who cares?
Read any reviewer’s work long enough and you’ll find their patterns, be it a food critic or romance reviewer. While a trained critic might have a different kind of opinion than an ordinary fan, is it really any more valid? Not to the fan. I might love a book because because I like a mystery with my romance, or dislike it because I don’t care for domination and submission, aside for stating my reasons for my like/dislike I have no need to justify myself.
In the end, is it any different than pizza? Get 20 people in a room and try and get them all to agree on what is the ‘perfect pizza’. Some trained food critics might pick ‘pizza A’ based on their criteria, others Pizza B or C, while fans might disagree. And poll the same group next year and you might get a different answer. But who really has the final say of what is and isn’t a success? The fan. They buy the books.
Romance novels are, by definition, entertainment. We can justifiably complain about historical or technical errors, perhaps lack of logic, but the book is ENTERTAINMENT and that is a purely personal preference. We don’t all like the same thing. And good luck on the ‘perfect pizza’.
#13 by Jessica on March 30, 2009 - 5:49 am
Keishon wrote:
I am exactly the same way. Totally fickle when it comes to authors. But then, they are sometimes fickle when it comes to readers.
Sarah Frantz wrote:
I agree. I felt just that way reading Hills and some of the academic literature on fandom he inspired. My point wasn’t that there is no difference b/t academics and fans, but more that (a) there is less difference than it seems, (b) you probably are a lover of some aspect of pop culture if you theorize about it, and (c) I am just like every other blogger with a WIP, it’s just that my WIP is nonfiction.
Victoria Janssen wrote:
Oh yes. I hope I did not imply otherwise.
Kate wrote:
I felt this way, too. I am very susceptible to others’ expectations of me, even when they are a figment of my imagination. It’s a curse.
Kate wrote:
Well, the mark of your character is what you do when nobody is looking, isn’t it?
And I am one of those 8.
But for me the issue is only partly an issue of bias (because I could, after all, cultivate friendliness with authors I love and then not review their books on my blog.). I am resisting allowing the interests of authors and industry to become my interests. There is a difference, to me, in hoping my favorite authors keep writing and hoping they sell a lot of books. If you are an insider, you know these overlap, but if you are the average reader, you don’t think much about it.
Tumperkin wrote:
This is a great question. I saw you asking this on DA, and I didn’t have a good answer then or now, except to say that for me the thing that makes Romanceland a community is (a) a love of the genre, (b) reading a lot of romance, and (c) dialoguing about it with each other. I do think all communities develop implicit rules of practice (norms), but there are always community members who break the rules, some who are selfish, and are still members.
I agree there is and should be something in blogging that answers only to the blogger (it’s like any writing that way) and her desires and interests. That it’s a form of individual expression. But I also happen to like looking at how communities and their norms develop.
KristieJ wrote:
I love the way you put it — because isn’t it way more important to have a friend than to be able to blog about books without the appearance of a conflict of interest?
Unfortunately, I think a lot of what goes on is the kind of pseudo-friendships you find online, just enough to make the reviews less than objective but not enough to replace the good of lack of bias with the greater good of true friendship.
But, you know, everyone has to decide what matters most to them.
Nicola O. wrote:
I find it so interesting that this particular hobby has the effect of turning us into writers. I mean, I have other hobbies (music) that don’t inspire me to try to become an expert.
ReacherFan wrote:
I agree. This wasn’t what I thought was unique about Romanceland. It was the internal conflicts created by overlapping relationships.
ReacherFan wrote:
I am also an occasional expert witness, and in my field, whether you are writing or giving a talk, you have to sign a disclosure form. I have always felt disclosure is mere handwaving to the ideal of nonbiased scholarship, a rubber stamp, often a lie, and a waste of time. But what’s on the line in those cases is a much biggger deal than what’s on the line in Romanceland, so here I think disclosure is enough.
katiebabs wrote:
I think so, definitely. I think the upcoming publication of the Smart Bitches book shows that line is vanishingly thin.
#14 by Janine on March 30, 2009 - 4:50 pm
I don’t think those birds are as rare as all that! At Dear Author, at last count there are ten book reviewers and one movie reviewer, and so far as I know, I am the only aspiring romance author in the bunch. My impression is that the majority of bloggers (especially among those who write reviews) are still readers with no authorial aspirations.
#15 by Venus Vaughn on April 9, 2009 - 7:49 am
I’m going to preface this by saying I haven’t read any of the above comments (yet), just your post, so forgive me if I’m repeating.
That out of the way, let me say that I think it’s great you don’t accept ARCs. And I also think it’s great that you don’t advertise – it leaves you freer to move in any direction you want as a reader. It gives you room to go on an erotica or historical or paranormal binge and rave or gnash all you want. You can go through your TBR at leisure, read books that came out two years ago or switch to categories for a months without wondering how it will affect your site in the future.
I do appreciate that some bloggers get ARCs, and I’m very, very glad that they’re upfront about doing so. And truthfully, it does put space between their words and my trust – but if we’re all upfront about it, I guess that’s okay. But bloggers who deny that they are influenced by the acquisition of ARCs are slightly delusional (IMO).
(And a personal peeve with ARCs reviews is that I don’t need to hear great things about a book that I can’t buy for another 2-3 weeks.)
I doubt any blogger is gleefully rubbing their hands together wondering how they’re going to manifest the next big wool-pulling plot over Romanceland’s eyes based on their SuperSekritBFF relationship with a publishing house and two authors. But to claim blind objectivity is just as ridiculous.
Yes, it does take all kinds. Yes, there’s plenty of room for the professional reviewer (even the ones who aren’t getting paid). But I’m glad you’ve carved out this space for just the reader.
Oh, and also, in the spirit of full disclosure, I am an aspiring author in middle of a WIP.
#16 by BevBB on May 13, 2009 - 9:22 am
I love this post for obvious reasons. I just found it after reading your post today on sex on RtB. That sounds weird, I know, but true.
#17 by azteclady on May 13, 2009 - 12:20 pm
typos: hatesses them.
I swear, I know that the plural of persona is personas, no apostrophe needed *hanging head in shame*
Now then, Venus Vaugh said (in part)
That’s one reason I post my reviews on the day of release or as close to it as scheduling permits, no matter how early I may have gotten the ARC.
This is one of the things I appreciate the most about Karen’s blog. I can post whatever I want and review whatever I want–new, old, romance, mystery.
The thing that has kept me coming back to this post (Bev’s comment just gave me the excuse to comment *waving* thanks, Bev) is this:
I understand this is not personal (yeah, imagine, not everything is about me
) but I know that I strive to be both honest and ‘fair’ (objective? gah, not sure how to phrase this) when I review, regardless of how I got my greedy little hands on the book.
I just checked the reviews I’ve written in the past sixteen months. Out of 134, only 19 were ARCs and 15 more were review copies. Further, some of those ARCs were prizes from blogger or author giveaways (a total of 42 of my reviews are of books I’ve received as prizes, in fact) and only for three of those was reviewing a requirement of entering the drawing.
So I look at these numbers and wonder whether I’m deluding myself in thinking that no, I do not allow myself to be influenced by the thrill of getting ARCs. (And that’s not even looking at the grades I’ve given several of those “freebie” books)
#18 by BevBB on May 13, 2009 - 3:22 pm
azteclady wrote:
You’re very welcome. What caught my attention was how much most of the post sounded like some comments I’d made in response to another post here (http://www.racyromancereviews.com/2009/04/20/do-author-comments-have-a-chilling-effect-on-review-discussions/) and I had to double-check to make sure which came first.
It always amazes me how much these topics intertwine and double back on themselves. Or maybe it shouldn’t at this point but it does.
#19 by Jessica on May 13, 2009 - 3:35 pm
Thanks for sharing your POV, Azteclady. I have my own reasons for not (usually) accepting ARCs, as I mentioned, and not all of them are altruistic or even rational. I agree with you that there is no reason to assume that ARCs/review copies influence reviews: I think it depends on the reviewer, the blog, and the book. For example, if you are a reviewer who has been getting ARCs for years, isn’t there a dulling of the “gratefulness effect”, assuming it ever was there to begin with?