An Authorial Snit

Mrsgiggles take on the whole thing:

http://kg184613.bravejournal.com/entry/34978

Late to the party and have now put this blog on my G. Reader.

All I can say is that after 4+yrs on the SBBB and one of the “”refugees””… What Chryssa said sums it all up perfectly.

As for the book, I could have cared less about the pairing. My SB enjoyment ended with ITS, ITF was just as bad IMO. I’ve posted my opinions on both elsewhere, but to bottom line it the writing style/characters did not interest me. I was not a fangirl of SB’s. It was my first MB and I made some wonderful friends over the years. I had spent about 6mths before the kerfuffle trying to break the habit and wasn’t succeeding at it. I missed “”the gang””. I’m happy they decided to stay over at the BLMB, it feels like home again.

I’ve read DON… If I noticed how poorly it was editted. The hanging plot threads… the how did they get there from here…. everyone else should have.

S.

Mary,

it’s comedic irony at it’s best!

we are lectured to outright and via subtext throughout her stories, to point out to us our own unacknowledged, ignorant, intolerance (read: our narrow minded bigoted ways) and yet, she cannot tolerate to hear, read or listen to an opinion which she doesn’t agree with, hmmm

guess Ghandi said it best when he said “”you must be the change you wish to see in the world””

brecken

As much as I don’t care for what she’s saying/doing, I can’t say I really want to deprive myself of a good reading experience. I enjoy her books, even the ones I haven’t thought were as good as the others. So, maybe I’ll just start getting them new from the library and buying them used later. B/c I do want to keep them.

I too, was a diehard Brockmann fan. I’d never read a romance until a friend gave me Brockmann’s Unsung Hero and wham, just that fast, I was hooked on Brockmann and the genre both! I was ecstatic to find there were 4 more already in print for me to read. And each book was better than the previous one!

That said, the honeymoon ended for me when her character Max, was decimated by a poorly written story in his book, turning him into a character few found recognizable or enjoyable. It had a grossly disjointed story, which seemed to continue in books following and from that book on, I’ve yet to be able to finish another Brockmann book.

The authorial snit, precise summary that it is, has being going on for a year and a half! But the fault lies with Brockmann. Her “”interesting bulletin board community”” abruptly ended when Brockmann decided to silence dissenting opinion and then in 08, to use it as a platform for Obama’s election. Thus began the blatant harassing of loyal fans and longtime posters who had differing views, replete with outright name calling, including inferences to Nazis and the labeling of some as members of the Third Reich by other board members. Brockmann’s claim of ignorance on the aforementioned was patently absurd, as she and members of her camp were signed in and online for days upon days, during that time period. Additionally her camp and her family members frequently post on her board, it would have been impossible for them to miss.

Though claim she did, and as of late, appointing moderators “”to be her eyes and ears””, several of whom are clearly unable to differentiate between an insult, an argument, and an opinion, not to mention, first amendment boundaries, as they troll other sites looking for criticism of Brockmann’s work. WTH? However, they seem to be following the example set, as Brockmann, merely days ago, condescendingly posted on her board: “”and babycakes we know who you are and my moderators are authorized to open a can of whoop-ass on you””!

what? Apparently, someone’s back in junior high now…Speaking of “”ought a get a life””?

From what I have observed first-hand, I believe “”smug”” is really more about “”there being only one correct opinion or view.”” For if you disagree with her views, “”you must not like her”” and you are “”disrespectful””, if you dare publicly air a contrary opinion, you’re banned! And, if you don’t like her books, then you’re labeled a homophobe first and then you’re banned (as it certainly cannot be people simply didn’t care for the story, oh no, it positively must be that they’re homophobes, and don;t forget homophobe begets violence! ..Huh? ….that logic is flawed beyond description)

now that I think about it? Brockmann really ought to remove the photo of herself on her website in that shirt with the slogan “”Talk About It””!! She obviously doesn’t believe in that! My question here though is how has Brockmann’s silencing everyone on that topic and creating a “”NO TALK ZONE””, furthered her cause or helped her child? How? Typically, people who change their mind on any issue, do so because they have been given food for thought. Now that’s a very difficult thing to accomplish when you have silenced the rhetoric and all so that you yourself will feel better in the short term! And worse by far, it impedes progress and nothing changes!

so when folks began to voice their disenchantment, just as she did on B&N, she said, they ought to leave her alone and get a life! well I did, after book eight, and it no longer included Brockmann books, but does include voicing my opinion! (after all, it’s still America, at least for a little while longer ;)

And the disenchanted became a serious voice to be reckoned with when she began a veiled dissing of the very heroes in the stories that put her on the map. Though, I truly doubt that she cares one iota about any of it since she inked her UK deal.

All in all, hopefully she will find some relief (BHRT) and soon, from what appears to be a lot of pent up anger and hostility, because the only thing more annoyingly obnoxious than someone’s constant paranoid chatter, is their delusions of grandeur……..

although, come to think of it…the two frequently do go hand in hand ;)

Thanks to Chryssa for a thoughtful, well written post that calmly summarizes some very turbulent events surrounding this controversy.

Misty said: I’ve kept out of this because I’ve never even heard of S. Brockmann until this kerfluffle, but I have a question. Did the idea that the author was trying to surprise the readers with a pairing they weren’t expecting come from something the author said, or just speculation?

She said multiple times that she wanted readers to be surprised by the h/h in book 14 (Dark of Night) and wrote her own cover “”blurb”” for the book so the h/h would remain a secret.

There were clues supporting both sides of the triangle by book 13 (Into the Fire), but the clues for Dave getting the girl didn’t start until book 10 (Into the Storm) and were thought to be red herrings by many simply because there been so many clues for Decker & Sophia in the previous books (which turned out to be all smoke & mirrors). She listed Decker & Sophia as a couple on a poll she created and referred to the story arc as the “”Sophia and Decker story arc”” multiple times in the Reader’s Guide she wrote. The 3 major characters were introduced back in book 7 (Flashpoint) in 2004.

Probably the shortest explanation-with arguments from both sides- can be found in the comments from one of Sandy’s previous blog posts
http://www.likesbooks.com/blog/?p=273

Although there’s always the big thread here at AAR as well as a poll/thread from Dear Author on Reader Expectations and various other threads at boards like Amazon, etc. if you feel like reading ALL about it :lol:

I’ve kept out of this because I’ve never even heard of S. Brockmann until this kerfluffle, but I have a question. Did the idea that the author was trying to surprise the readers with a pairing they weren’t expecting come from something the author said, or just speculation?

@L:

“”And if she posted at some time in the future that she had no idea her mods were wearing jackboots, she has a right to say that as well.””

As I said in a earlier post – there is a thing called due diligance and it is based on the idea that if you are in charge of something(which she is as board owner) claiming ignorance after the fact does not make you not guilty.

She has put people in charge of moderating her board – people she vetted – and as a result is directly responsible for their every action as moderators…even she does not visit her board in a year. These moderators have gone well beyond any normal duty by actively seeking out any member (past or present) that has posted a negative (in their minds) comment anywhere in cyberspace….in many cases these members have never posted anything negative on her bb but are now being punished regardless.

SB also states that her moderators are being “”attacked”” on outside bb’s – yet she has no problem with them cyberstalking and ignoring the hate that is spewed on her own board……I had no problem with SB or her books until this latest brouhaha and until I was banned last week for daring to stand up to people on her board in defense of others (again, while saying absolutely NOTHING negative about SB or her books).

I have no problem with her banning people if they ARE causing trouble or promoting hatred towards others (as you said it is HER board), however, I believe the whole situation has gotten completely out of hand and she does need to acknowledge it in some way or another besides claiming that everyone is a homophobic psycho that is after her and her loyal fans.

The right to say something does not make it the right thing to say.

The right to do something does not make it the right thing to do.

Rights are more about the lowest acceptable behaviour rather than polite interactions.

If Brockmann wants to be seen as hypocritical and shoot herself in the foot, she has every right to do so. It doesn’t mean I believe it is the best, most correct course of action.

She is not posting on other boards trying to censor speech there. She is limiting access to her BB. Her corner of the web where she pays the bills. And if she posted at some time in the future that she had no idea her mods were wearing jackboots, she has a right to say that as well. Just as it is my right to call b*llsh!t.

I agree with anon. Limiting contact is probably the most sensible course.

After reading more of this so-called train wreck here and elsewhere on the web, I’m all the more convinced that authors and readers should not engage with each other about anything except the superficial, “”Thank you, I’m so glad you liked my book!”” or, “”I’m so sorry this book didn’t work for you, I hope you’ll try the next one.””

I think, IMHO, there is a lesson to be learned here, for both parties. I think Brockmann’s biggest mistake may have been two-fold — 1) making her BB more of a family living room, where she took offense when invited guests began asking her why she put cinnamon in the cookies when the recipe had always called for nutmeg (which, understandably, and from Brockmann’s perspective, is a little rude), and 2) adding politics when the discussion was about cookies. –shudder–

I think there are several big name authors (SEP comes to mind, but I could be totally wrong?) who have personal BBs, but I _think_ the authors themselves are detached from them. IOW, the readers have a common area where they can all get together to discuss the books, and maybe once a week (or in a blue moon) the author steps in to say hi and “”gee thanks!”” and whatever, but he/she doesn’t get involved as if the talk is personal. If readers disagree on whether the cookie recipe has changed, well, the author isn’t in the living room to care — the guests can argue all they want.

But politics? Ouch. Nothing ruins a good conversation between a thousand different people like politics, especially this last election in the US. Then throw in some good old Prop 8 discussion for flavor? On purpose? That’s like setting the table with bacon-wrapped T-bones steaks then opening the door to a pack of starving wolves. Try, just try, to keep them from helping themselves and destroying your dinner party.

It’s sad that so many people had their feelings hurt. It seems unnecessary to me, but I can’t help but think it’s just wise for an author to distance him/herself from readers except for TOTALLY superficial book talk.

Avalon- I have no problem with free speech. I just do not make the assumption that a privately paid for corner of the web is the same as a city street.

Brockmann can let whomever she wants on her site. Or not. She can allow any topic. Or not. She paid for it. Her name is on it. She is not restricting anybody from saying anything they want anywhere else. Her board. Her rules. Her choices.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking that everyone else should have freedoms on her message board except the person that paid for the bandwidth. If she said every post had to be written in Haiku format or be deleted, that would be her choice as well.

All rights are restricted in some manner. We all know and submit to them. No guns on school property. No yelling “”fire”” in a crowded theater. My right to swing my fist ends before I hit someone else’s nose.

The question really is where is free speech defensible and where is it not?

L: I don’t think the question here is so much about the restrictions and rules Ms. Brockmann wants to have on her own mb (IMHO it’s her board, her rules), but whether it is ethical to ban people from any board based on something a person posted somewhere else. It’s a slippery slope IMO: For one thing, different mbs and blogs have very different tones and therefore what you post on one might be way out of line on another.

As a bystander I find this whole hulabaloo very interesting: it’s such a case in point of the way internet works and the ethics involved. Many of the problems seem to stem from the fact that there are restrictions on communication with written text, where most of the tones we get in real life discussions are missing simply because we do not actually see or hear the person we are talking with. Hence the sometimes excessive use of emoticons etc. ;) And the Big-Mis’s, which seem to spread at the speed of ligh from one blog to another.. :lol:

My rule of thumb: always try to remember to read what you post before clicking “”send””. And never post anything when you’re pissed off, because once it’s out there in the wonderful world of the WWW, you won’t be able to “”undo”” it. For us ordinary posters it’s not such a big deal if we misbehave sometimes, but for authors, actors, politicians etc. things you post in the heat of the moment can really come back and bite you in the behind-her/him bigtime.

If people are so very concerned about free speech, by all means pay for your own message board and put your name across the top and allow whatever you want. Or not. Just like Brockmann has.

I am amazed at all this. I haven’t read the book and/or know what the author said or meant to say etc. and frankly I cannot get excited about all of that.

But one thing really, really worries me… What happened to freedom of speech here? All I get from this is the message that if people don’t like your opinion, it gets erased. And not just on one board… no, various boards are monitored, links to ‘bad’ boards are being removed etc.
Sorry, but this is 2009. Aren’t we passed the time that people say “”I don’t like what you’re saying so off with the head””? Obviously not. Poor poor freedom of speech.

I do, therefore, have serious doubts about an author(!) who supports or even encourages something like that. I recently bought her first book in this series, but I’m not so sure I want to read it now.

Maybe I’m naive or too optimistic about human nature, but I just cannot believe things like this actually happen.

Dearauthor had a column today, while not on the same subject at ALL, talks about the author/reader relationship.

http://dearauthor.com/wordpress/2009/02/10/the-journey-of-reading/#more-9895

An author Leslie Kelly stated this:

I guess you should therefore count me as someone who totally believes in the partnership. I will not change my writing based on reviews or reader reaction, but neither will I hand the reader rare roast beef when they asked for ham and expect them to blithely come along and keep quiet about it.

Again, their article is not talking about SB, but the author/reader relationship. I just quoted Leslie Kelly because she so distinctly summed up my expectations of an author in my relationship with her/him.

And I think that this is the expectation that Panthercrawl, and many of us had of her.

L said: If a reader says “I’ll forgive her if she’ll just tell us…” then that reader has placed a personal stake in something that should not really be personal.

I dont know if that is what I meant if that was directed at me. But I did think that the author could justify her reasoning behind going a certain direction. (and she basically could have been nicer about it) I mean had she gone Decker/Sophia, this book is barely discussed. But she didnt and in turn broke all romance ‘rules’. So please, tell me what you were thinking. Why did you think this would be a good idea? Why did the last 4 books say this but now it says this?

I mean back when Jules and Robin got thier HEA she had this whole long post on her board about how ‘that happened’. Basically explaining how Robin would not shut up inside her head and was dying for his HEA. I honestly, expected more details on her writing process to get us there. And I honestly expected her to be able to clarify why she lead people a certain way and then pulled the rug out. I dont think it was explained well in the book. And some authors have more insight than they can put on paper. Isnt that the whole purpose of a Q&A. Or should it just be “”I loved your book, when is the next one coming out?”” Because she doenst tell you whats in the next book, so the answer be “”Thanks, I loved it too, stay tuned””. That would be the lamest Q&A ever. LOL.

@Laura Vivanco
“”It suddenly occurred to me that maybe it had something to do with Dr Sarah Frantz’s comment, made at Dear Author but also discussed on a thread here at AAR, that she had a “professional relationship” with Brockmann.””

Yeah, I’m pretty sure it was the DA discussion.

Tee,

If you don’t care, why do you keep posting in this discussion? We will talk about it as long as it continues to interest us. People are taking turns posting their opinions and experiences

The so-called Suzanne Brockmann train wreck has been months in the making. As a former, long-time poster at the Suzanne Brockmann Bulletin Board (SBBB), I was an eye witness to some of it. After years of polite and pleasant interactions, with some impressive collective efforts of good deeds, (bone marrow donor drives, support the troops efforts, to name just two) the SBBB had a shift in tone in the latter months of 2008. Despite the protests of a few posters, Ms. Brockmann decided that the BB was an excellent outlet for discussing politics, particularly her support of a particular candidate. That might have worked, except that a very small number of posters ran roughshod and were not reined in. In the process, many feelings were hurt, long time BB members left, others were verbally abused and some tried to negotiate peace. The overall tone of the BB changed dramatically in a few months. It was no longer a fun, friendly place. The day after the election, a discussion of Prop 8 in California was started. It was another stage of the train wreck. A few days later, Ms. Brockmann put the BB on a “”time-out”” without warning, saying that she would take a week to think about whether to re-open the BB or not. Posters who had gathered there for years had to scramble to maintain contact with long-time cyberfriends. Fortunately, there were enough email addresses in enough peoples’ address books that it was possible to reconvene on our own. A week later, Ms. Brockmann announced that the BB would re-open with moderators – moderators who were not initially identified by Ms. Brockmann. Her “”Welcome – or not”” re-opening message focused completely on gay issues; she made it sound like the implosion was due solely to a gay vs. anti-gay rights split. That Prop 8 thread was the last straw, but the camel’s back had been cracking under the strain of many issues for months. A number of former posters chose not to return to the SBBB and some struggle to straddle it and the “”refugee camp”” – for lack of a better term. I can only speak for myself, but the irony for me is that in many respects, my political views and values appear to align with Ms. Brockmann’s, yet I felt disrespected and alienated on her BB for a number of months before the shut-down. While I’m willing to concede that Ms. Brockmann might not have been painting all DON naysayers with the brush of homophobia at B&N (although that was my first knee jerk reaction to those sentences), there is a history of Ms. Brockmann boiling complicated events and issues down to pro-gay and anti-gay. One of the former SBBB posters, turned “refugee” – again for lack of a better term – followed that B&N response up with a very calm and thoughtful post on the SBBB about how disturbed she was at being categorized like this. Ms. Brockmann’s response was … interesting. During the B&N Q&A session last week, Ms. Brockmann chose to implement a log-in procedure simply to view her BB, not just to post on it. She said she’d been playing around with some settings and had discovered this feature; she then said it was like closing the curtains so others couldn’t look in at the party. It doesn’t take an MBA to recognize how such an action is a bad marketing and PR move during the week following a new book release and participation in a forum such as B&N. One would think an author would want to encourage, not discourage visitors at a time like this. She did disengage that log-in-to-lurk feature quite quickly; it sounded like her own BB regulars didn’t like it. There have been other actions which indicate a closing of the ranks. As mentioned by others, a few former posters have had their log-in access revoked. One that I know of received a harshly worded announcement last week which, in effect, said that she was being banished for having made posts which “actively work against her [the author’s] interests”” at various internet sites. The implication was that this reader’s posting activities away from the SBBB had been monitored and judgment had been passed. Sandy refers to a similar incident and message. I don’t know if we’re both talking about the same person or if this message has been sent to multiple people. Either way, it’s one thing to exercise control over what is stated on one’s own… Read more »

Panthercrawl, I just checked and Mike-the-Seal falls out of the dedications between Out of Control and Into the Fire which is back in 2002. Wow. So when I said I posted there for aeons, I meant it.

I wasn’t in the least suggesting that Suz was currently scared by threats made back then – I’m seemingly failing to communicate with clarity at the moment – what I meant was that because that incident happened, I can believe that it could happen again (with different people involved). Does that make sense?

(FWIW, and it’s not worth much, Mike-the-Seal advised Suz on many of the TDD books, and some of the TS books, and posted on the MB at that time. Some posters even met him, and were friends with the family. Turned out he wasn’t a Seal, which led to a bit of a parting of the ways on the Board, as some people refused to believe that he’d been lying. Very, very ancient history.)

Leigh: I understand you know the poster in question, and are sure she was unjustly banned from the Board. I do understand that. But, putting yourself in my shoes, all I know is that someone -unnamed – has been banned from the MB for a set of posts I didn’t read.
I don’t know what you want me to say to that. I hear what you say, but without knowing any of the details, I can’t know what I think about the moderator’s decision.

The funny thing is Mmca I dont know whats happening (or a lot of the undercurrent). She or her board may think I’m some undercover ‘out to get Brockmann because she has a gay son’. And the ironic thing is, I agree with her politics (the ones I know) about 1000%. My best friend is gay. He lives in California. Prop 8 affected him.

I didnt like what she tried to do with DON. She kept the couples a secret. Did she think nobody would want to know who they were? Did she think nobody would go back and reread looking for clues? We did. And we discussed it – in great detail. And then we would get another spoiler and discuss that in great detail. It just went on and on. We discussed lack of foreshadowing (come on who can tell me they thought Decker and Tracy would have HEA?), we discussed misleading polls on her website, we discussed reader expectations and author trust. Can I tell you what happened on AAR 10 years ago? No sorry. But if she is still feeling threatened by whoever posted about Mike the Seal (dont know who that is) she has issues. She was talking about AAR (because her board does – yes I browse there too but there is rarely anything good on it). And if people on her board (who post all day) can criticise us for posting all day all I have to say is ‘pot, your kettle is calling’

Panthercrawl, you wrote:

“”Because honestly I would have liked for her to have come out without being pissed off and said “Listen I tried to go one way. I’m sorry if you felt mislead. I was trying something new. No, you are not an idiot for thinking So/Deck was a reality (despite what the people on my board said). I wrote it that way and intended for you to buy it that way, otherwise the surprise wouldnt have worked” In the end, that probably would have worked for me. (I also have questions about why it took 5 years for this to happen but I wont go into that). Instead we were given, lots of people did like it and if you didnt you must not like Jules either (wink, wink, you’re a homophobe)””

I too would have been satisfied with the answer above, that’s all I and others were looking for, real answers. Instead we got sarcasm, intimidation and were accused of cyberstalking/threatening/being a homophobe.

I have to wonder what the PR department at her publisher thinks of all this hoopla. On one hand yes, any publicity is good publicity. But on the other hand Suzanne Brockmann is a brand and her brand has been tarnished. Even some of her supporters are saying she has handled this all wrong and this controversy has spread to all corners of romanceland (of course since Suz isolates herself and doesn’t read any of these sites it’s easy for her to label all of us as being part of a very small minority, with no power or voice, a part of a lunatic fringe)

But a year from now people aren’t going to remember what I wrote, or what Leigh wrote but they will remember the things Brockmann has said, and her reputation is without a doubt taking a serious beating.

I just don’t read it that way, Sandy. I take it that she’s dismissing the lunatic fringe as the lunatic fringe.

I posted on her MB for aeons, so I’ve a lot of loyalty to the MB, and may well not be objective – but I do think there have been posters out there with an axe to grind.

The ‘probably don’t like Jules either’ accusation is something different, but I think there is a history behind it.

Very recently there was real unpleasantness on the MB about Prop 8.
Now a) I’m not American, so my understanding of Prop 8 is limited, and b) I had virtually left the MB at that point – was back to read the political discussion about the US election – so I’m not up on the details.
Anway, from what I saw, the row was about whether expressing happiness that Prop 8 had passed was homophobic and unacceptable, or part of normal political discussion on the board. This, to an extent, led into a discussion of freedom of religion – so a very flammable mix. People were banned, some core posters left, and the MB was shut down for a time. In the interim, regular posters founded their own board.

Now, seems possible to me that what Suz is suggesting is that a small number of posters are still angry about the Prop 8 row, and the subsequent dissolution of the MB in that incarnation, and are therefore venting about DoN. That is she possibly thinks that an amount of the on-line criticism for DoN is backlash from that event.

Whether that’s true, I’ve honestly no idea: I can’t imagine anybody but former MB regulars would know.

And, yes, seems impolitic to say it on the B&N thread: that’s author promotion, and you’d think it would be sensible to ‘smile and wave, boys, smile and wave’.

Sandy, Sandy, Sandy. Everytime I’m out, they pull me back in!

Hi all. I’m panthercrawl and a DON Thread addict. I’ve been post free for 5 days now.

Seriously folks. Did we spend too much time posting about a book? Yes. But was the discussion “”I’m pissed”” “”Me too””. No. There was so much more than that. And trufully outside of being outraged by her website marketing of the couple (listed as a secondary plotline with all other couples listed getting thier eventual HEA), I’m pretty sure all posts were related to characters and our opinions of them.(see library’s post for a synopsis) SB has stated (NOW) she always intended to do this couple. So she obviously mislead So/Deck fans from the get go. I guess I was just hoping in the end she would have come clean and been a tad nicer about hooking me in for all those books.

Now I know from her post on her board from a while ago that some stuff went down regarding politics and prop 8. I have posted on her board 2 times (about books) in all these years and I only go there at book release time (its kind of a boring board. happy birthdays and such). I loved Jules and Robin (which for those of you who dont know was a gay couple a few books ago, not this one). So I think unfortunately a couple of things happened. A) she wanted to surprise her readers by leading them one way and giving them something else (well, surprise!) and B) this personal thing happened on her board. So now any questions related to A seemed to be answered with B. Kind of a ‘oh you didnt like the book, well I know who you are dont I?’

And I’m bummed she cant separate the two. Because honestly I would have liked for her to have come out without being pissed off and said “”Listen I tried to go one way. I’m sorry if you felt mislead. I was trying something new. No, you are not an idiot for thinking So/Deck was a reality (despite what the people on my board said). I wrote it that way and intended for you to buy it that way, otherwise the surprise wouldnt have worked”” In the end, that probably would have worked for me. (I also have questions about why it took 5 years for this to happen but I wont go into that). Instead we were given, lots of people did like it and if you didnt you must not like Jules either (wink, wink, you’re a homophobe). I was so shocked by that comment, that I decided I was done. (Thanks Sandy).

To my friends in that crazy DON thread, it was a pleasure. I laughed a lot. I found some great reads and I know more about me as a reader and the character Dave than I ever wanted to. To Sandy and the other AAR members, thank you for being our host and dealing with our thread at the top for 2 months. I dont read a lot of new releases so I’ve never really participated before this but I think I’ve broken out of my shell.

BTW, in the end, there were parts of the book that I liked a lot. (and yes, some I hated but I try to block them out) Overall, I think I would give it a C+/B-. (As a standalone – never read the characters before – I would have given it an A-)