(a review of consumer reviews...)

I turned the last page of a novel I’ll call Willowfire. It was, to me, like many books, good-not-great. It was an MFA novel, written by an MFA graduate turned MFA instructor, published by a small literary press primarily for the consumption of MFA students. Like many MFA novels, much of it was about a man who doesn’t get enough sex and wonders about the meaning of life. Three years later, I still remember some of the characters, and the general feeling the reading stirred in me, but as with many novels, my memory of the details have faded.
What I remember most was visiting Goodreads, upon completing the novel, to see what others thought of the book. Editors, agents, and other professional book people have long warned writers to avoid reading reviews of their books on the site. And yes, on that day, I couldn’t resist a side trip to the reviews of my own novels, and the negative ones can sting, but it was a particular review of Willowfire that was the perfect example of a problem I’ve worried about for a long time.
Someone had attacked Willowfire with the dreaded one-star rating, and in the review complained primarily about what she believed was the author’s inaccurate portrayal of real estate prices in Alberta, Canada. Housing costs weren’t really an issue in the novel in any way, but the reader downgraded the whole book based mostly on the irrelevant supposed inaccuracy. Not content with ignoring the many positive attributes of the book, and focusing on a handful of what she believed were inaccuracies about Canada, she trashed the entire book. She even went so far as to contact the author, mentioning that she’d edited her review, revising her concerns, as a result.
There’s something very wrong in online reader reviews of books. A bizarre delight in cruelty and attitude of reader entitlement has spread throughout the major outlets for said reviews.
Of course someone will argue I’m expressing these concerns as a response to negative reviews of my own books. I can only hope people will consider the possibility that the problem I mention is far more significant than my own bruised feelings.
A professionally published novel is incredibly difficult to write. The writing and revising process, even before acceptance for publication, often takes years, sometimes many years. I’d like to think that if all online reviewers understood the thousands of long hours required to craft a book, the percentage of negative reviews would dramatically decrease.
I don’t suggest that the reader’s experience or valuation of a text is invalid just because a writer worked hard. But many reviews are unreasonably harsh or harsh for ridiculous reasons.
Many negative reviews and ratings are on the basis of the book not being the reader’s favorite genre: “Thunder Heart Flower Love” is a romance novel. Not really my thing because I prefer action-packed, detective mystery books. Plus, I could tell from, like, chapter 3 that the man and woman who started out disliking each other would eventually fall in love. I prefer the suspense of the ending being a mystery. 1 star. The romance novel is not flawed merely because the reader prefers a different genre. And a romance is definitely not a mystery. The reviewer didn’t crack some profound code. Everybody knows the couple is going to work it out for love in the end. The fun in in how they overcome the struggle to reach that point.
Similarly, a reader might trash a book, like: “High School Football Superstar Heroes” gets 1 star because it features too much football and I don’t like sports. Plus, pretty much the entire plot involves teenager issues. Ever hear of growing up? Ever hear of the young adult book genre? And the word “football” is right in the title, printed on the front cover above a football player running the ball in a game. The obviously sports-centered book doesn’t deserve a low rating because a sports-hating reader chose to read it.
A book hasn’t failed because the reader isn’t its target audience. Book reviews and ratings are only useful if they attempt to measure how well a book succeeds at what it was meant to be. Is the combat in the action-thriller novel realistic and exciting? Does the science fiction book explore complex social concepts related to new technology or scientific discovery? Does the romance novel bring us that tingling tightness in our hearts in the anticipation of that long-awaited kiss?
Other book trashing happens because the reader assumes a bizarre sense of ownership over the plot or even the author. I have heard rumors of writers who have had to go into therapy due to angry reactions from readers claiming to be fans but expressing that fandom in unfair ways: I love all of Shirley Herbokowitz’s books, including the Justice Swordfall trilogy. I even went to the midnight release party at my bookstore so I could be the first to know how Chrysanthemum finally dumps Dirk so that she can be with her true love Jasper. Except [SPOILER] when I reached the end Chryssy chose Dirk! This is crap! I didn’t read all three books for her to end up dating Dirk! 1 star! I burned all my copies and the library copies. Now I hate Shirley Herbokowitz! All writers hope readers will care about their characters, but not to the extent that the reader feels he has the right to demand a particular ending for a book. It’s not a Choose Your Adventure novel.
Some online reviewers hate books because they make bizarre and unfair assumptions about the authors: Goat Boy doesn’t have a close relationship with his mother at the beginning of “Goat Boy and the Silver Sword,” and the author doesn’t mention his mom in the acknowledgements. It’s clear the author hates his mother and women in general. 1 star. A pity. It would have been a great fantasy novel otherwise. An acknowledgements section can never include all the many people who helped the writer, directly or indirectly, write the novel. The omission of someone from the acknowledgements doesn’t mean the writer hates that person.
Of course in today’s politically charged America, readers are bashing books due to the real or imagined politics of authors. Whether or not readers can enjoy a book written by an author with whom they profoundly disagree is a topic for a different essay, but the politics of some authors have been unfairly judged due to some precarious leaps in logic: One of the characters in “Saturdays At Skippy’s,” an adult contemporary novel about love and lasting regret, mentions that he doesn’t think people should be able to own machine guns! That kind of anti-gun communism just shows the author is a socialist, trying to indoctrinate readers to disarm and accept the globalist sharia law agenda! I give this book and its commie author 1 star while I wave my American flag! The simple presence, in a novel, of characters who disagree with one another should make it obvious that authors are not their characters. It makes no sense to downgrade a book because one or more of its characters holds ideas with which the reader disagrees.
But perhaps the biggest problem with online negative book review culture is the sheer exuberant cruelty with which books are attacked. Many readers seem to take delight in employing heavy sarcasm or ridiculous hyperbole to mock books: The characters were so boring, I’d rather have all my teeth cut out with a chainsaw that had been lubed with hot sauce. A simple claim about the characters not seizing the reader’s full interest would be enough, but the enthusiastic attacks earn more attention for the reviewer.
Perhaps it is that extra attention that leads so many readers to such harsh book reviews. Often the most aggressively hateful reviews garner the most likes and comments. Groups of hateful reviewers work together, amplifying disparagement of novels that many of the haters seem to have not even read.
I don’t suggest that people must like every book they read. I have despised some of the novels I’ve read. But I’m reminded of the words of Don Quixote author Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, “There is no book so bad…that it does not have something good in it.” And knowing something, as I do, of the incredibly hard work required to write a novel, would half of the aggressively negative reviewers be so harsh if they had any idea how much time and work is required to produce a novel?
Fine. A reader discovers elements of a novel that do not appeal to him as much as he’d hoped. Those elements ought not eclipse the many positive attributes of the book. Some defend their book attacks with the dubious excuse of providing some kind of protection for other readers, but considering almost all books have more positive than negative reviews, it’s easy to see that tastes in books varies widely. A book one person lambasts is another’s favorite novel. What good is done in the vicious online bashing of books? Why not seek that coveted online attention by genuinely helping potential readers find the books with the positive attributes they are seeking?
Why not offer real encouragement to readers by celebrating the wonderful aspects of books instead of soliciting cheap attention by attacking books and their authors? Surely more people are moved by the magic of books through a novel’s positive attributes rather than a hostile rant against real or imagined flaws in a book or its author. A little civility and respect, a shift in focus from the negative to the positive, might be an incredibly much-needed boost in enthusiasm for an endangered book culture. Books are one of the best aspects of our society, and as such, they deserve the best we have to offer in reviews.
Trent Reedy is the author of Divided We Fall, Burning Nation, and The Last Full Measure, a trilogy about the second American Civil War; If You're Reading This; Stealing Air; and Words in the Dust, which was the winner of the Christopher Medal and an Al Roker's Book Club pick on the Today show. Trent and his family live near Spokane, Washington.
Comentários