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:

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.

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)

(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.)

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.

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.

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 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).

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)

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.

I am one of those rara avis who has no desire to write or be published. (Well, other than blogs and comments therein.)

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.

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.

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 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.

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:

though there IS a community, everybody is not friends.

Oh yes. I hope I did not imply otherwise.

Kate wrote:

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.

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:

I think I’ve just become more protective of my reputation as a reviewer, for whatever that means to my eight loyal readers

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:

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?’

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:

A few have slipped passed the author/reader barrier and for that I am truly grateful,

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:

Mostly because I love to read so much, it seemed the natural profession — right?

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:

It’s really not that unusual for any ‘community’ on or off-line to have apparent conflicts of interest.

I agree. This wasn’t what I thought was unique about Romanceland. It was the internal conflicts created by overlapping relationships.

ReacherFan wrote:

n my work as an expert witness, there is an obligation to disclose all past work and current ties,

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 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.

I think so, definitely. I think the upcoming publication of the Smart Bitches book shows that line is vanishingly thin.

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’.

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.