You Can’t Review Your Friends. You Just Can’t.
Okay, so maybe it’s just me who can’t, but I really don’t think so.
It’s hard to remember these days, but the respect and credibility we now take for granted for this online thing we do didn’t come without a battle. When Laurie Gold started All About Romance, online reviewing was still, with the exception of The Romance Reader, made up of sites producing happy-happy-joy-joy reviews.
But Laurie Gold fought. And fought. And sometimes she got knocked back on her face and there were certainly missteps along the way, but, for the most part, there is now general acceptance from authors and publishers that honest reader reviews are good for romance.
It wasn’t easy getting here, but it happened. Welcome to the new world, romance readers!
With that said, the happy-happy-joy-joy review has its place and its audience and those sites are upfront enough about what they are that readers who want a friendly approach are happy and those looking for honest reviews know to avoid them. No harm, no foul, so I’m not talking here about the softball sites.
Here’s the thing that’s making me increasingly uncomfortable: With Twitter bringing authors and reviewers closer than ever before, a line that used to be hard is now getting blurry.
Day by day you get friendly. And then friendlier. And then all of a sudden more matters than just the words in a novel. That’s only human nature and it’s completely understandable, but it sure as hell can put a dent in the credibility we now enjoy.
I’ve seen the phenomenon more than a few times over the past two or so years. Someone either very good at writing or very good at social media (or both) becomes the new It Girl, loudly proclaimed at multiple venues as the Greatest Writer Ever.
From my perspective, in several of those cases the accolades (though they were decidedly over the top) were warranted. In other instances, I just don’t see it. But, that’s just my opinion, and it should be taken as such.
I’m not holding myself up as perfect because I am about the furthest thing from it, but on this issue at least, my hands are clean. Once I’ve gotten friendly with an author I’m careful not to review her again because, as soon as considerations other than the book enter the picture, anyone would be free to legitimately question whether or not I produced a balanced review. And, even if I thought I could put everything aside but the book, I still don’t do it because the appearance of impropriety is just as questionable.
That’s the way print journalists do it and why should we be held to any lesser standard?
Human nature is what it is and we should all be careful that when we recommend something that we’re doing so based on the words on the page. That’s all I’m saying.
We’ve yelled and screamed for romance to be taken seriously, and here in our online world, we’ve succeeded. Romance deserves serious non-softball reviews – something that a few people worked very hard to make publishers and authors willingly accept and readers trust. Let’s just all be careful out there with the trust we’ve been given.
So, what do you think?
– Sandy AAR
I needed to send you that little remark to be able to give many thanks as before on your splendid ideas you’ve featured at this time. It is quite pretty open-handed of people like you in giving extensively just what many people would’ve sold as an e book to help make some cash for their own end, particularly considering the fact that you could have tried it in case you desired. The guidelines in addition acted to be a great way to recognize that other people online have the identical keenness the same as my own to know the truth significantly more regarding this problem. I think there are lots of more pleasant situations up front for those who check out your blog.
Here is Danial Everett. Could u add a backlink on this page? You can reach me at DanialLynch9659@yahoo.com or ICQ:172579401
I find it very hard to say something unflattering in public about the work of my friends or even close acquaintances. It either takes a lot of courage or a thick skin to make a truthful review if the book was written by someone you were close to. The internet has changed the way we establish relationships. But I think a writer’s first commitment should be honesty, whether she’s writing a review or whatever. The readers such as myself would really appreciate that.
MaryK, your remarks deserve a reply and I wanted to think before making it.
You are probably correct that the Big 3 have different audiences. However, I disagree with your saying AAR is resistant to change since there have been big changes since we took over as publishers. These may not be enough for you and that’s okay. We know we can’t please every reader.
But I will say this: all of the online communities are insular. I have heard from some who post here who say they don’t feel welcome at the other two. Perhaps it’s perception and it is certainly regrettable, but there it is.
With that said, it’s clear that we all have different styles and approaches to reviewing, and I truly do wish you the best of luck elsewhere.
Emily, your comments are very heartening. Thank you.
I teach, and my students submit essays with numbers instead of names. Why? Not because I’m an unfair grader but because some students are sweeter than others, some are brattier than others, some I expect more from, and some are in difficult circumstances and I might cut them slack when I shouldn’t. So…
Sandy, you’ve written a gutsy post and I’m with you. In this situation, one in which people’s wallets are affected, objectivity is crucial. And even if some reviewers think they can maintain objectivity, a lot of us are going to be skeptical.
So…you shouldn’t review your friends’ work at all? Or you shouldn’t review your friends’ work if you don’t think it’s great and can’t be honest about that? Or you shouldn’t review your friends’ work even if you do think it’s great?
I have to disagree with this post mostly because when I review I try to find both positive and negative points to discuss. It’s VERY rare that I’ve ever given a completely positive review–the only one that comes to mind was a review of an academic text, not romance at all–and I try to be both critical and kind regardless of whether I am friendly with the person I am reviewing. To me, that’s what makes a review useful. Someone can look at my review and go “”oh, those things she doesn’t like are not important to me”” or “”egads, I’d better steer clear of that.””
I am not super-close with any of the romance or mystery authors I’ve reviewed over the years, so maybe that makes it easier for me. But I’ve certainly reviewed less-than-positively people I like a great deal.
By “”the Big Two review blogs,”” I assume you’re talking about DA and SBTB since those are the Big Two to me. I’m not sure why you didn’t just come out and say that instead of making vague blanket statements, but then I don’t know much about journalistic standards.
I only occasionally read the reviews at SBTB because their tastes don’t mesh well with mine. I do enjoy the discussions there though, and I’m fascinated to discover that some readers find SBTB to be biased toward authors. On the other hand, I practically haunt DA so I’m definitely familiar with their reviews and I’ve never felt like I was reading a softball review. I’m very curious to know which ones are thought to be unbalanced.
On the whole, I’m pretty surprised to hear that these sites are considered to be overly friendly with authors. In my surfing around the internet, I’ve not come across much love for them from authors. In fact, one of the DA reviewers was kicked out of RWA for expressing anti-author opinions. Yes, I know about the twitter thing. I follow them too. Has their friendliness on twitter affected their reviews? I haven’t seen it. I do sometimes find them pointing out flaws that I, reading non-critically, probably wouldn’t have noticed and would be just as happy not to have pointed out.
And as far as I’m aware when some of these reviewers have participated in conference panels, they’ve represented the reader’s point of view rather like ambassadors. I certainly don’t consider presenting reader opinions to industry professionals an activity that compromises a reviewer’s integrity.
I’m a reader who pays attention. I’m a discerning reader. I am not easily led, and I rarely agree with the majority opinion. I rarely visit AAR these days because I don’t connect with most of the reviewers. As my interests and tastes changed, I found the AAR community to be too insular and resistant to new ideas. AAR, DA, and SBTB are different. They each have a different style, a different focus, and as far as I’m concerned a different audience.
Neeley, I don’t believe I’ve ever agreed every single time with any reviewer online, so that is quite a track record. I don’t blame you for sticking.
Diana nails it. I believe many reviewers can and do review honestly regardless of their relationships, but what I’ve seen on some of the romance blogs for several years, and especially on the “”big two””, has made me distrust not only those blogs but amateur reviewing in general.
“”The twitter lovefests among authors, publishers, agents and reviewers are killing credibility, at least for readers who pay attention.””
I’m one of those readers, and this increasing tendency both on Twitter and in the style of some of the blogs has pushed me away from the (large) parts of the community that engage with them. It’s left a bad taste in my mouth that’s pushed me almost completely offline with my enjoyment of romance.
Frankly, I just go on experience. Without fail, every time I’ve purchased a book recommended by DA or SB I have agreed with their assessment overall. Some I liked better than others, but I never felt mislead. Two other blogs have been taken off of my reading list because they kept recommending (and I kept buying) sheer crap. I don’t care who is friends with whom as long as I can trust the reviews and I have yet to question that trust with those two. it’ll always be trial and error to a point, someone could suddenly stop being able to be objective. But after one or two bad books on their recommendation, I’ll quit believing them. To me it’s as simple as that.
I shouldn’t need to say this again since I think I’ve made my point, but I’m not talking about an occasional tweet. I am talking about prolonged and friendly tweeting that veers into cliquish friendship. I think most of us recognize the difference.
I want to thank everyone for the spirited and cordial debate. I think Twitter has introduced an entirely new dynamic to the author/reviewer relationship that I don’t feel has been much examined. Thanks to everyone for taking a look with me.
@ Jill Sorenson
I think that if others had your sensible head about author/reviewer relationships there wouldn’t be a problem. Every time I see you give an honest review on Dear Author, I think, “Wow, she’s so brave/level-headed/professional/whatever”! The problem is that not everybody is that honest. I know that in the past I was too nice when reviewing friends’ books. I’m actually embarrassed about some of the positive reviews my name is attached to.
Because of that I decided to stop reviewing books of anyone I’ve been in contact with.
@dick
Of course a friend bias is a different thing! A nice person is capable of writing a terrible book (in fact, this is often the case). I HATE seeing people recommend books their friends wrote, because in my experience those books have almost always been dreadful. Friends reviewing friends means five star reviews are being given out to books that are really only one or two star reads.
I really could not agree more with your post, Sandy. Before I began blogging, I spent several years as a news reporter for daily newspapers. It’s so deeply ingrained, right from the beginning, in J-school and in the newsroom, that even a perceived conflict of interest can bring about serious problems. You said it best when you mentioned the appearance of impropriety, because, after all, appearance is at times more important and more influential than reality.
This is a statement that, I personally think, drastically undermines how reviewers work.
It implies that if we know someone and like them as a person, we will automatically write glowing reviews. Because humans are so shallow that being friends with someone negates any option of a good critique. While I think some reviewers do in fact do these things…for the most part, they tend to be impartial. I’m friends with authors. I review their books. Some of them I love. Some of them I don’t.
So does that mean I’m being selectively impartial and other times finding myself writing a positive because I like the person? No. I remain honest. Because if I’m friends with someone I want them to know what I like and what I don’t like. I will say so and say that the writing is not the person.
Furthermore, I think print reviewers were still biased. They are biased. I see tons of people who review in print who are online and blogging and doing other things. Before any of this came about, I’m sure it was more mysterious…but that’s not the world we live in anymore. It’s like saying historical romance authors should still use near-rape in every story because that’s what the old ways were and things might change. Whether you like it or not, people have relationships with authors. The best thing to do is to tell them that if they review them, you want to know if they have talked with the author and may hold a bias. Because that’s a lot better than dictating whether they should review at all.
I don’t think your message is saying what you want it to say, because it honestly implies that anyone that does this is lesser in their standards and isn’t as qualified a reviewer. Which they aren’t. The best people are the ones that can be friends with someone and still critique them. If you don’t want to do it, that’s fine, but it’s a little ridiculous to say there are standards when online reviewing isn’t print reviewing.
In my loathed dayjob, I’m a lawyer, and I’m sure that colors they way I look at this question. Several of my dearest friends are also litigators, and while I love them more than I love my luggage, I’d never dream of trying to do anything less than my best against them. And I’d be offended as hades if they let our friendship make them pull any punches.
I had to learn very quickly in my day profession that winning and losing are largely beyond my control, and I would go crazy if I let that validate my work. I have to decide if I’m satisfied with my work before the verdict is rendered. And if I am satisfied with it, then a favorable verdict is gravy.
Same thing in writing. It’s not personal, it’s a profession. If we truly care about each other and our profession, we hold each other to the highest standards. And we accept that we can’t always hit a home run for every client — I mean, reader.
Of course, there are some things you can’t do – spouses shouldn’t try cases against each other. But for the most part, I try hardest when I’m trying to impress a friend.
Jill, I fundamentally disagree with your assertion that it’s okay to review friends, but you’re a thoughtful spokesperson for “”the other side.”” Your comments are not overly defensive nor self-congratulatory nor hostile and your points are well-made. I think it’s safe to say that we’re talking about the Big Two review blogs here and what concerns me is that they’re REALLY not small in terms of readership and influence. Those blog owners seek mainstream media attention and are often quoted as spokespersons for Romancelandia. You can’t have it both ways, claiming to be “”just a reader blog”” while sitting on industry conference panels with all the attendant media hooplah.
The twitter lovefests among authors, publishers, agents and reviewers are killing credibility, at least for readers who pay attention. Claire brings up a valid question. How many would-be negative reviews are never written because of established friendships?
I have a review blog aside from my writing, and I agree. Especially having a rating system on The One Hundred Romances Project. I can’t see it being fair to personally review friends or other authors from my publisher. In fact, when my publisher first offered a story for review, I made sure to let her know I would never review my fellow authors from that company, and I had no control over whether or not my other reviewers would give a favorable review. The girls are very forth-coming, too. They recuse themselves if a story comes through email and they either know or have worked with that author.
There’s no point in offering fair and honest reviews if you don’t follow the guidelines you set forth. I find it so disappointing to see review blogs run by authors who personally read and review authors they work with, and always ALWAYS give those authors rave reviews. It’s not hard to track the connections, and I don’t trust any of their reviews now. To me, it’s just a sneaky promotional vehicle.
Now, if I read a book by an author I know, and I love it, I’ll squeal about it on my personal blog, and make a point of saying I have a connection. Because frankly, I AM tainted by the knowledge. In a good way. When I find an author whose work appeals to me, and I find they’re a lovely person in real life, the combo makes me happy as a reader. It’s nice to know there’s a good heart behind the words.
I thought about this for a few days and while I haven’t really changed my mind, I agree that AAR has a great reputation. Your reviewing model works well and you have trustworthy reviewers. Perhaps a large site like this needs different standards/policies than a smaller reader blog, where transparency would suffice.
But a bias is the basis for the liking or disliking.
I have a bias for small-town romances, and because of it I like this book.
I have a bias for this author, and because of it I like this book.
In either case, the biases are equals, for their results are the same. It’s only in those cases where one has to say I have a bias for this author, but despite that I dislike this book that trouble arises. It isn’t the review but the persons who might suffer.
I agree with Sandy, its just easier not to review friends. Even when a friend asks me to read their work and ask for feedback, I tell them I’m not a professional and save myself some grief. I don’t want to hurt their feelings or damage the relationship. Its not worth it.
No worries… I know you can’t guarantee two reviewers will totally disagree when reviewing a book. But it is sure fun to read when that does happen. : )
I haven’t been able to read all the comments so don’t know if this has been brought up but I wonder how many reviews are just not published because they would be negative. If a reviewer thinks a book is a C, D, or F, I want to know. I think its best for a reviewer to keep a distance from the author.
Reviews are very subjective and transparency is a key component to a good review. If a reviewer doesn’t review their friends’ books, “”friend”” bias won’t complicate matters. However, as long as a friend disclaimer is listed, I don’t think it will ruin the reviewer’s integrity to review a book from an author they are friends with.
I use the information a reviewer gives me as an information tool but I don’t base my purchase of a book on a reviewer’s thumbs up or down. I’ve discovered books I thoroughly enjoyed from reviewers who hated the books. If the summary in the review fits my criteria and what drove the reviewer crazy isn’t one of my pet peeves, I will buy the book. If the summary doesn’t fit my criteria…it doesn’t matter how much the reviewer likes the book….I won’t buy it. Reviews are guides.
I actually find many of my books through Cover Cafe’s cover contest. Researching the covers keeps me up to date on new releases and I have a weakness for buying books because of the covers. I’ve found some great authors and some not so great authors…but I have a great selection of beautiful covers, no matter what. :>)
I still can’t see the problem. If all reviews are biassed, what difference does it make whether the bias arises from the reviewer’s likes and dislikes or from friendship?
The way I think about it, dick, is sort of Venn-diagram-ish:
“”I like small-town romances; ergo, I liked this book.”” This makes sense.
“”I like this author; ergo, I liked this book.”” This does not make sense. Liking a person is not the same as liking a book.
Of course, we bring bias to every book we review. We are only human. And, frankly, I want to know what a reviewer’s personal reaction is to a book.
But “”I like small town romances”” is very different from, “”I like her soooo much and I know she worked soooo hard on this book.”” I think most people understand the difference.
Clearly, others don’t feel the same way and feel that disclaimers are enough to inform the reader. I am not here to change anyone’s beliefs, I simply wanted to highlight a trend I find disturbing.
Little examination has been made of the effect of Twitter on the author/publisher/reviewer relationship. I think it’s an issue that needs to be highlighted.
I agree, but perhaps people are reluctant to discuss the author/reader relationships on Twitter. Not all readers and authors who are on Twitter cross that line, but there are some, almost cliques in Twitterland between author and reader. Personally, I sort of admire the authors more who don’t cross that line and remain friendly (love that) but professional.
The appeal of the AAR site is the combination of reviewers and posters. I’m certainly not going to say I liked or disliked a book on the message boards just to agree with another poster who I have come to respect through the years. I feel comfortable giving my true thoughts. If that were not so, I would not still be here posting. On the other hand, it’s fun when there’s a positive connect with a book with other posters, but the banter has to be honest among them all or else it’s wasted time and useless information for everyone. Honesty, tactfully given, is key.
The same with reviews. They need to be totally honest and I feel, for the most part, that the reviews here at AAR are that. Sure, some bias works its way in sometimes—that’s human nature. But, all in all, the reviews are refreshingly honest, unlike other romance sites on the web.
So, don’t publicly review a book by an author you are totally friends with. Maybe some people can do it, but I think that friendship could get in the way of a thorough review. I know I would have a difficult time saying negative things if I considered any author a true friend. That’s a very difficult thing to do, especially when those words reach cyberspace. When I say on the boards I didn’t enjoy a book, I keep it to the book or the style, and not the author’s personality. If there’s a friendship, then all those lines can blend too closely.
I agree. I think it is very hard to be critical of a person who is a friend online, or in real life. I wouldn’t want to hurt that person’s feelings in the process. Same goes for book reviews. How are you supposed to be totally honest if you really don’t like the book? The friendship would have to cloud the judgement of the reviewer in most cases.
Well, when I reread my post it sounded like I was dismissing the reviews here. That’s not what I meant. I read the AAR reviews daily and thoroughly enjoy them. Plus I’ve added many books to my TBR list based on the reviews. It’s just that I take the reviews as reviews from people who are basically strangers whose tastes I know very little about. For me they are informative, but not decisive.
I take every review I read, “”professional”” or the in-the-trenches readers on goodreads, as subjective opinion–nothing more. While someone with more lit or writing background might be able to judge the prose better than I can, they are still going to be biased. No matter who we are, we like what we like. Sometimes, “”just serviceable”” writing is swept aside by a clever plot or imaginative setting. Other times, an author’s excellent prose breaths new life into otherwise over-used plot lines. I can’t count the number of times in the past three years (since I’ve been reading romance) I’ve heard rave reviews about an author or a book, and when I read it I couldn’t imagine how anyone thought the writing good.
So I agree with Jill Sorenson. Reviewers should be upfront about their relationship to authors they are reviewing, but then let ‘er rip. The best a reader can do is find reviewers with whom they generally agree, and weigh their reviews more heavily than others. I like the ability on goodreads to compare books with other readers. Personally, since I can’t get a handle on the general tastes of the individual reviewers here on AAR, I put more emphasis on the reviews of goodreads friends who have a high percentage of ratings that agree with mine on books we’ve both read.
I have been participating in the online romance community for the past 10 years, and have enjoyed it, but I have to say that in the last 2 years or so, Twitter appears to have changed the relationship between author and reader. When I know a reviewer is best buddies with an author on Twitter, I cannot read the review and take it seriously at all. I sometimes find these relationships a bit odd, and also time consuming to Twitter the whole day long, but that is a subject for another time. :)
Janet, the Suz B fiasco reminded us what happens when we get too chummy and realize that pedestal is rather tippy.
It was my first online haunt and my biggest disappointment that in time sorted itself out. But, it took the shine off the “”fan girl”” part of books. I have never been a “”fan”” of anything… but I felt like part of a group.
So, no I don’t thing readers and writers should actually be BFF. Acquaintances, but fans…. well, I’ve been there, tried it once and yanno… we’ll pass on doing it again. I think I little mystery… even a little “”hero worship”” if you will… is better at a distance. Also, let’s be blunt… how many authors do you still read 10 books later??
Janet – very interesting post. But I didn’t say or mean any of that, I really didn’t. Most review sites let the reviewers choose the books for themselves – actually I don’t know any that don’t. I said that everyone has an inbuilt prejudice/preference/bias, call it what you will.
Just to make it clear – what I meant was that everyone comes to a book with a set of prejudices, just because we are not robots. We have inbuilt cultural expectations, we have personal likes and dislikes. I pay most attention to the reviewers who have read the same books as I have in the past and come to the same conclusions. That means our tastes probably coincide. And I love that I can do that.
I know a lot of authors, but I’m friends, real friends, with a dozen or so. I share my angst with them, I brainstorm with them, we discuss things. So I don’t review their books. I can’t. But if one of them writes a book I love beyond reason, too right I’m going to pimp it. Just not review it.
You can’t review a novel totally objectively. It’s not possible, because we’re humans, not automata, so stating obvious and known prejudices is probably fairer and gives the reader a good idea of where the reviewer is starting from. That’s all. I thought that was common sense, to realise that everyone comes at a book from a different point and with different expectations. Otherwise, why read more than one review?
Example? I love books about small town America, because to me they are exotic. something well out of my experience, close enough to understand, far enough away to be different from anything I’ve ever known. Another reader might love them because of their familiarity. But we’re both loving the same book.
When I read both reviews of Dangerous In Diamonds, it never occurred to me that Scarlett (D+) was not friends with Madeline Hunter. By the same note I never thought Dabney (A-) was her BFF. The reason those thoughts didn’t cross my mind was because I assume the integrity of every reviewer at AAR is intact. I assume that the books they review are not written by someone they have strong feelings for. I have to believe this, otherwise AAR is just a waste of time and review space. I have been to other sites I feel are biased, and I gotta tell you, I NEVER go back. If I want an unbiased, straightforward review I come to AAR.
I have purchased books that other sites have raved about and AAR has given a less than stellar rating to, and almost to a book, I have found that AAR was right. Unlike some, I do not look up just reviewers I have agreed with in the past, because I feel that you all have something to tell me about a book. Therefore, if one of you becomes friendly, or unfriendly with an author and starts reviewing books based on the author rather than the book, how am I to know? Are the reviewers gonna start giving us a list of their “”friendly”” authors? Of their “”enemy”” authors? This way lies madness.
You can sugar coat, justify and rationalize it all you want, but once integrity is lost it never comes back. Sandy is right, “”You can’t review your friends. You just can’t.””
Oh, and BTW, if I should see a review that starts with “”this is an author I am friendly with….””, I’m skipping to the next site.
And BTW again, Scarlett was wrong and Dabney was right! :-)
Where to start, where to start. How about I start with Sandy’s refreshingly frank — well, OK, not refreshing, because Sandy always is, but her riposte to Lynne’s discovery that all the books reviewed at AAR are self-chosen and therefore (in Lynne’s opinion) already subject to a filtering system of sorts, “”Lynne, as I’ve said before, we’re not reading masochists here.”” Are there reviews sites I frequent — I’m speaking in Romlandia, where the reviewers aren’t saying yeah or nay on which books they review?
Besides, look at the review grades assigned at AAR over the years — self-chosen clearly doesn’t mean that the reviewer will necessarily like the book. It is what it is. I do some reviewing, mostly more opinion pieces but who’s going to tell me what to review? Am I on staff at the Washington Post and someone forgot to tell me? We’re all doing labour of love time far as I can tell — NOT, gawd forbid that we’re not doing it professionally and #tothebestofourabilities …
I find some reviewing authors I know better for their remarks about authors who review other authors than through the pages of their books. Is that a good thing?
Thank you FarmWife for touching on the Suz Brockmann meltdown … but I’m fading to black on that one. You either remember, in which case you probably have an opinion, or you don’t.
When there’s a steady drumbeat of #thebestevahauthor/book and one of the drum hitters reviews the book, I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but I factor that in when I read their review. I personally like the approach over at Heroes and Heartbreakers — there are a few upcoming books I’m perfectly happy to squeee a bit over and share particularly fine bits — I like reading the same from other fans — but that’s more of a celebration and a sharing. I can get behind that.
Clearly there’s a ton of grey in this area — but the discussion of should authors be reviewing other authors, when they’re friends, has killed so many cyber trees that I can’t say I want this discussion to continue ad infinitum.
The very first post I ever put up on an All About Romance message board was: “”I’m an author; does my hanging around here make you as readers uncomfortable? Will it make you avoid any discussion of my work? Because if it will, I’m outta here.”” The responses I got at that time were refreshingly honest and made a lot of sense and could generally be boiled down to, ‘not if you’re not a crybaby, but if you are, it will probably be better for everybody if you go.’ I totally respected that, and within a week, I was involved in a conversation where someone called me out about a glaring historical error in my latest book, which I hope I took like a woman because the reader was dead right. This would have been around 2004.
I can see where this would be even more of an issue for the actual reviewers. I think any author who becomes even acquaintances with a reviewer has a responsibility to keep a thick skin and not expect any favors, to in fact expect that reviewer to err on the side of the negative when critiquing their work. But even so, I think Sandy’s right; any relationship you have with anybody is going to color your perceptions of their art. If you’ve met someone and she’s been an absolute horror, her book better be better than Gone With the Wind or you’re probably going to hate it. And if she’s a sweetheart, you’re going to want to like what she writes, consciously or not.
The problem is, because All About Romance IS one of the very few entities giving serious critical consideration to romance as a genre and does host such an active and opinionated community of readers, any romance writer worth the name is going to want to at least check in. Nobody wants to write in a vacuum, and nobody smart wants to only bask in the kindness of the all-praise-all-the-time sites. We want to know what readers are thinking, and, not to be coy about it, we want the readers here to know our names when they walk into the bookstore. And of course romance writers are romance readers – we want to find the next great book to read just like anybody else. But that’s not what the site is about; All About Romance is not for writers; it’s for readers.
I think Sandy and any other reviewer is perfectly within her rights to say she won’t review friends and won’t become friendly with anyone she might someday want to review. I think that’s just as valid as the writers who decide not to read reviews at all. For me as a writer, my feelings won’t be hurt if someone I’ve traded comments or emails with doesn’t like my book. But they also won’t be hurt if someone whose very serious job it is to review books like mine decides she’d rather not be pals.
Yep, that’s exactly it.
Its really hard sometimes to keep that employer/employee relationship separate. I work for a psychologist who has 3 other therapists in her office. I am friends with all 4 not because it was something I pursued it just happened…we are of like mind and I really like them all…we don’t socialize often but we do. Two of the therapists also counsel my adult children, it has not yet posed any issues…but we have made clear rules as to how we handle this…I am never present when my kids have their sessions, since they are adults it does help…I have always been respectful of other and their privacy so for me the temptation to “”sneak a peak”” has never been an issue. HIPA laws require that I be extra careful so I am always conscious of that.
Its really the first time I have crossed that employer/employee bridge…I am glad I did! :)
Lynne, as I’ve said before, we’re not reading masochists here. We pick books that sound good to us, so, yes, that is where we start. That’s often not where we end up, but it’s definitely where we start. And, yes, I expect that is true of most review sites.
So your reviewers are predisposed to like the books because they already know they like the genre. Most review sites work on that premise, whether they realise it or not. I do come here a lot for reviews, and there are reviewers I agree with, and others whose preferences don’t agree with mine. So I look up the ones I know have enjoyed the same books I have in the past.
Not to say anyone is right or wrong, but opinion is what these sites are all about.
I don’t too often read reviews, at least until after I’ve read the book. The reason is that nearly all reviews of romance fiction are based, IMHO, on the likes and dislikes of the reviewer, often zeroing in on a hero the reviewer thinks is an ass or on a heroine who that particular reviewer thinks is totally unlikeable or TSTL or an element of plot that is a “”hot-button”” for the reviewer, or a trope that the reviewer disliked before reading the book, and the conclusion usually is that the HEA, even though the author puts one in the book, is doubtful at best and probably impossible–in that reviewer’s estimation. If reviews of romance fiction are, as most admit, personal opinions, then it’s most likely all reviews of romance fiction are biassed to some degree.
The only harm arises to the reviewers’ sense of their own honesty, if they fudge when reviewing a friend’s book. There is, IMHO, very little general harm to romance fiction reviewing as a whole.
We choose the books we review at AAR, Lynne, so a reviewer is not going to pick a genre that generally doesn’t work for them. We also always provide a plot description and reasons why we liked or didn’t like a book so readers can decide for themselves. I’ve occasionally inadvertently picked books set in D.C. where I live when the setting is not part of the plot description. I am hypersensitive to geographical and other local flavor errors authors make so I always point out my bias. As you say, it’s only fair.
Sandy and JML, that’s exactly why I state it upfront. I try to avoid reviewing books by friends, but if I feel I have to, then I will say so. Then the reader knows my bias upfront, and they can decide if they want to discount it or not.
The book I recently reviewed was part of a multi-author series, and I reviewed the whole series, so it would have been hard to leave it out.
For the same reason I also state if certain tropes don’t work for me, for instance, I avoid most Superomance books because they often centre on babies, and I don’t particularly like babies or small children in romances. Other people love them. So someone reading a review I’ve done of a romance that didn’t work for me can think, “”but I love that. I’ll pick that one up.””
Every reviewer is biased one way or another, whether they realise it or not. So it’s a good idea, I think, to state it, then the reader knows about them.
It has become so difficult for readers who depend on review sites to know who is being honest and who is being diplomatic.
I don’t think the majority of reviewers think of themselves as prejudiced toward or against certain authors but it’s human nature to defend our friends and come down harder on the work of people we don’t like. All the twittering and socializing between authors and reviewers and agents and editors has to make an unbiased review almost impossible or at least less reliable for the reader.
If I know a reviewer is friendly with an author then the review is meaningless even if it’s negative. That may not be fair to the reviewer but the price of books has made me more serious about where I spend my money than I ever was in the past.
I’ll also say that I don’t think authors do themselves any favors when they have friends or family edit their work. For a trustworthy opinion find someone who doesn’t think you’re ‘all that’ and ask them what they think of your work.
Ditto on loving the dueling/dual reviews!
Lynne, I wanted to think about your comments a bit before replying. A friend of mine was teaching high school English and he was talking about subjectivity in grading and he said whenever he read an essay that wasn’t especially good from a student he knew to be talented, he would think to himself, “”well, so and so wrote that, so, gee it really must be all right.”” That made sense when I remembered the “”you’ve done it again, Sandy!”” comments I got sometimes on high school papers that I’d written in an hour the night before they were due.
For me, the personal just creeps in there when I’m evaluating. And it’s almost always positive — the good feelings I have about a person definitely creep into my reactions to a book and I’ll be honest and say I think my judgment goes out the window sometimes.
Reviews are to give readers an honest reaction to a book and I’m not sure of mine when friendship is involved. Which then leads me back to the established rules about not being chummy. There’s a good reason for them.
Jill, of course, we can question the status quo. But, here’s where I’m coming from: That credibility we now enjoy was hard fought and there are still established pockets within the romance community that think all reviews should be “”nice.”” We’ve still got work to do, IMO, and the more we model ourselves after established “”respected”” publications, the easier it will be.
You have to do what feels right to you.
I totally agree. But there is a difference between acquaintances – people you know through social networks and might socialise with – and friends.
I review for The Good, The Bad and The Unread, and recently I gave a friend a less than stellar review. Since friendship means more to me than reviewing, I contacted her first. To be honest, if she’d ask me to pull it, I probably would have done. What I wouldn’t have done was to say I really enjoyed the book when I didn’t.
I don’t review books by publishers I’m already with, or lines I write for (I recently signed with Carina, but I’ll still put up Harlequin Presents reviews, for instance). If I feel strongly about a book that a friend has written, I’ll say that in the review, that the person is a friend. Some books are too good to ignore!
When I review, I do it for the reader, not the writer. I do think that’s an important principle.
I don’t fan girl… EVER. An author’s making it to my “”buy”” or “”library”” list is solely dependant on whether or not I like their writing. Now, my “”reviews”” aren’t… they are comments about things I may have liked or disliked about a certain book. I am always amazed at people that will write “”I didn’t like the book”” and still give it 4 to 5 stars…. IMO, their reviews are not credible. I regularly recommend books I didn’t like to others that I know will and I regularly read a book that had a good review that got a poor rating b/c that plot interests me. If I dnf’d a book due to poor writing, I’ll mention that. If I dnf a book simply due to the fact I didn’t prefer the topic, plot etc, I won’t list it as all since IMO that’s personal opinion.
Is the author/fan girl thing getting a little close….. IMO yes. Is that I good thing… having been there, done that with the Suzanne Brockmann bb meltdown… No… and will never do it again.
No, it’s not outlandish at all. But can’t we question the status quo? I think transparency is another solution. Instead of not reviewing, the reviewer can just be honest about their relationship w/ author. And readers can decide if they think the review is worthwhile.
There are several authors that I am friendly with and have reviewed their books. I state in the review that we are friends or are acquainted and let the reader decide whether that influenced my review. Readers aren’t stupid, they can figure out if a reviewer and an author are friends and if that has affected the review.
Can it be awkward reviewing a friend? Hell yes. I have turned down some because I worried I couldn’t give a good review but I’ve also reviewed some that were less than glowing and it hasn’t affected our relationship.
I agree that not all reviews should be happy happy joy joy. I don’t do those and that’s stated up front in my review policy. It’s also a good idea, as some have mentioned, to look around and read a range of reviews, particularly with a new or new-to-you author. You get a better feel for the writing and it’s strengths and weaknesses.
I do talk with authors and publishing professions via twitter; it’s helped me make connections, put in review requests, and has given me a broader knowledge base. It’s also just plain fun.
Jill, it’s not as if I am suggesting something outlandish. This is the way the “”real”” print world of reviewers has always been. You can’t get chummy with the people you are reviewing, even if you think you could be objective, it’s not a good idea because your review could still be questioned anyway.
And there is a difference between occasional banter on Twitter and friendship. I think a person knows when it crosses the line from the former to the latter.
I think your post has many interesting implications. First, there is the suggestion that authors and reviewers shouldn’t be friends, because if we do, impartiality goes out the window. I don’t necessarily agree with that. I prefer to be friendly with reviewers and not hold myself at a distance. I’m not going to be like, “”Sorry, I can’t banter with you on twitter. I want that review. Don’t care about your friendship.””
I’m also troubled by the idea that honest, less-than-glowing reviews are harmful to friendships and/or hurtful to authors. That’s not always the case.
I’m not saying that you should slam your best friend’s book, or any book, if you want everyone like you. I’m just saying that statements about who should review (impartial, professional, “”objective”” people) and who shouldn’t (friends, authors, etc) give me pause.
I do agree that reviewers should do whatever makes them comfortable, and not post positive reviews just to be nice.
This is exactly why I cannot take some review sites/blogs seriously. You can see the love in the comments and the back and forth talk with an author and the reader. Then a book is reviewed, and it is all about the love, and more love. I do understand not wanting to offend that online friend, but is it really a review or just a love letter to that “”friend””? Hard to say.
Indeed it does, Blythe.