Skip to main content

‘Oh, I never read reviews’, said the writer, his left eye twitching almost imperceptibly.

That’s what we’re supposed to say though, isn’t it? It’s almost a cliché of being an artist of any kind. But surely we do read them, don’t we? In a cold sweat at midnight, to the sound of an ice-cube rattling in a whisky glass? After all, why wouldn’t authors want to know what people are saying about their books? Surely there’s a lot to be learnt form how readers are reacting to our work.

When Haunters was published, I set my jaw and determined to face up to whatever might be aimed at it, reminding myself that any review was a good sign. After all, what can be worse than never being reviewed at all? So I set up google alerts, made occasional searches, installed the Goodreads app on my phone, kept the tin hat tipped back.

And so far I’ve been fortunate; Haunters has had mostly positive or very positive reviews. There have been some fair criticisms too, but no real nasties (though how’s that for waving a red rag at a bull?). I’ve seen how brutal some reviews can be, so I’m mostly just relieved to have reached today without being torn to shreds from the safety of some anonymous armchair. And yet it turns out that merely waiting to be savaged is itself a negative force. After months of low-grade anxiety over just the possibility of a slap, after feverishly dabbing at the Goodreads icon of a morning, after almost not logging in to Amazon at all, I’ve come to understand not only why authors say they don’t read reviews of their own books, but I’ve also come to believe them.

I realise this makes me sound like a pathetic bundle of nerves. And perhaps I am. But nervy over-sensitivity seems to be a good quality in any artist, so I won’t apologise. And anyway, here’s the thing: no one knows a book as well as the person who wrote it. I am already painfully aware of the shortcomings in everything I do, and gain little from having them broadcast back at me by complete strangers.

I know that honest reviewers can be frustrated by the “don’t-read-‘em” stance, and like all writers I’m hugely grateful to anyone who has taken the time to read and review any of my books (thank you!). But since not logging-in to Goodreads for several months has actually left me calmer and more productive, I can’t help drawing a certain conclusion.

I’m not sure anyone who hasn’t gone through the book creating process themselves can really understand how it is possible for imperfections to get through to print. But when you have a hundred plates to keep spinning, one of them is always wobbling — that’s just how it is. Close up scrutiny of that errant plate might make the writer feel bad – and the reviewer triumphant — but it’s hardly going to prevent it happening again.

A good writer friend recently summed it up nicely: the negative effect of a bad review is always greater in magnitude than the positive effect of a good one. And that is precisely why I have stopped reading any review that isn’t actually shoved under my nose. Because in the end, reviews are surely meant for readers first and foremost. Authors should just get on with writing their next book.

11 Comments

  • “not logging-in to Goodreads for several months has actually left me calmer and more productive” – I think this is true generally of much media where comparison is omni-present. I’m much more productive when I don’t over engage in perceived mass critical opinion….

  • Taylor464 says:

    Agreed. But don’t get me started on the star rating system. Of all the dumbass ideas…

    We do seem determined to let technology leech off us. But to my mind switching off has never more pleasurable.

  • Clementine B says:

    Great post! I do read reviews once in a while, every two months or so, because I think it’s useful to have links to (good!) reviews on an author’s website. But I never, ever respond- whether it’s good or bad. That’s the worst thing anyone can do. I also review books from time to time, and I really wouldn’t want the author to start responding to my reviews.

    I do think authors should read reviews once in a while, if only for the constructive criticism that they can gain from it. If they’re too worried about it, though, maybe they can ask their editors and agents to set up google alerts for them and filter the content.

  • Taylor464 says:

    Thanks for that, Clementine. Yes, I think it’s good to see a few reviews, but probably best to let them be the ones that an author is directed too or otherwise sent, as you say. Worrying about them generally just isn’t a productive use of time.

    Responding to reviews is always a bad idea, as you say. But I did once see an author comment on a negative blog review to the effect that he was sorry his book didn’t find favour and that he’d keep the blogger’s criticisms in mind for next time. The response from the reviewer and other commenters was really positive and the author came out of it well. Which just goes to show there’s always an exception to every rule I suppose.

    • Clementine B says:

      Hmm, interesting. As a reviewer in that situation, my first reaction would be – well, it’s great that you’re using my comments to improve, but… I didn’t write this review for you. I wrote it for the readers. The notion of reviews being for readers rather than authors is quite important I think.

      On a completely non-crucial note, the title of your blog post says ‘sould’ rather than ‘should’ 🙂

  • My novel, to be released in December, has a review on Goodreads from someone who read it on NetGalley.

    I can’t read it.

    My hands are cold and clammy, I feel like I’m going to be sick.

    It’s three stars.

    I’m not going to read it.

    What is to be gained from it? Maybe the reviewer found a hole in the story. Maybe he/she didn’t like a character. Too much cussing. Too much blood. Not enough blood. Who cares? Will I change the way I write because of a review? No. Reviews are for other readers, not for authors.

    Now my symptoms include a headache. My hands are very cold. But I’m not going to read it.

    • Taylor464 says:

      Michael, I know that feeling all too well. You are doing the right thing in not reading that review, since it can do nothing good for you. If it’s any help, I haven’t looked up any of my books on Goodreads for nearly a year, and I feel so much better for it.

      Good luck!

      (What’s your book called, by the way? Feel free to mention it here.)

  • Anne Cater says:

    I’m really interested to read your post. I’m not a writer, I could never write a book, but I am a book reviewer/blogger. Sometimes I feel ashamed to be part of the book blogging/reviewing community, especially when I read reviews that are downright cruel. If I really don’t like a book, then I don’t review it on my blog. After all, the aim of my blog was to share with other readers the books that I love, not to knock authors, or books.
    I don’t really understand how reviewers have the nerve to say some of the terrible things that I’ve seen. I can only assume that they themselves are failed authors? Sour grapes maybe?
    I hope that the authors that I review will read my reviews. I’m always very excited when an author comments on one of my reviews.
    It must be heart breaking for an author to read unfair and cruel comments about their work.
    I’d be very sad if people commented about my blog in such a negative way. I’ve had a couple of comments on my reviews that are on Amazon, and I didn’t feel very happy when I read them, it must be 100 times worse for authors.
    http://randomthingsthroughmyletterbox.blogspot.co.uk/

  • Taylor464 says:

    Anne, many thanks for your thoughtful comment. Reviews and reviewers are so important, to both readers and writers, but there is this unavoidable downside to whole process. A single damning review can cause a disproportionate amount of damage to a new writer’s career, and that writer has no right to reply. At least, writers are always told they haven’t. Even if they think the review is unfair.

    Another thing writers are often told is to ‘grow a thicker skin’, but I wonder if we really want our storytellers — especially those who tell stories to children — to be hard-bitten, insensitive types. Anyway, it also can’t be easy to be a reviewer in the days when authors are all over twitter and facebook, watching you. I wonder if eroding the distance that once existed between readers and writers is such a good thing. Having said that though, I’ve enjoyed meeting readers face to face, even those who are critical of some aspects of my books. In the end we just have to find a way through the minefield, readers, writers, and reviewers alike.

    Thanks again. T

  • Deborah L. says:

    I’m way late to this thread, but I wanted to jump in and say thanks for this. For what it’s worth, I give it 5 stars. 😉 I found this to be especially insightful:

    But when you have a hundred plates to keep spinning, one of them is always wobbling — that’s just how it is. Close up scrutiny of that errant plate might make the writer feel bad – and the reviewer triumphant — but it’s hardly going to prevent it happening again.

    That last line is crucial, I think. In fact, in all of the words I’ve ever read about reviews and authors, those nailed it best. No matter how hard we work, a plate will wobble. Yes, a constructive-criticism review CAN help us change which plate wobbles in the next book, but one will wobble. And a reviewer will spot it. And talk about it. And that’s okay because some other reader may really need to know which kind of plate wobbled before buying and reading a book. Reviews and reviewers are important for the process. But the process has the inherent flaw of subjectivity. That flaw doesn’t cancel out the need for the process (or even the process itself). But writers should keep that in mind. And…I wish the star system could be enhanced/improved.

    Final note: I cringe at some of the reviews I wrote in the early-early days of Amazon. About a year ago, I was crawling through them and was shocked at how nit-picky I was, simply because I could be. Unilateral speech is very permissive. I wasn’t mean. I even gave 4 stars. I was just over-critical. “Look at me! I noticed stuff!” It, itself, was 2-star behavior by me. There were only about five or six like that, but for those authors, that review mattered. So, I deleted them. Reviewers shouldn’t hesitate to go back and look at their work and see if they’re putting out 4- or 5-star-worthy reviews. Writers and public reviewers, who assign stars to a work for all to see, should be held to the same quality standards. (I just read a 1-star review for a Pulitzer Prize-winner that was stellar in its approach and tone. It was a 5-star review assigning 1 star to a wildly successful book. The review was helpful, gracious, classy, and kind. And still 1 star. The two things are not mutually exclusive. May I be so fortunate as to receive my 1-star reviews in such kind fashion.)

    Thanks for the great post and for letting us comment, as late (and long-winded!) as I am!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.