I didn't mean to offend the Religious Right. Honest.

[Donna Callea]

Today I got my first negative review for New Coastal Times, and it was a doozy. My other 12 reader reviews on Amazon have all been glowing, resulting in an overall Five Star rating. But not any more. Jeez. (oops, maybe I shouldn't use that word)

The problem was, the reviewer was offended because of political and religious reasons. And, honestly, I didn't think there was anything very political in the novel, although I did go on about organized religion and religious fanatics.

Anyway... I was wondering if others here have had similar experiences. I've pasted the review below:



Al Gore Possessed, July 14, 2010
By Frankie Sutton (North Carolina) - See all my reviews
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: New Coastal Times (Kindle Edition)
I bought this book based on the reviews that others had left. I love a well written apocalyptic story, this was not it. It was too Al Gorish and way too anti-Christian. Of course, I don't really think there was any religion that wasn't pretty much trashed in this book. The first part of the book was of course the rant about how us horrible human beings have caused the earth to warm and all the political statements of Al Gore and Obama.
It was supposed to be a fiction but it was really a treatise on global warming.

I really wanted to enjoy the book and without the political undertones and Christian bashing, it would have been a good story.

[Worldwalker]

There will always be wankers who want to remake the world (including the literary world) in their own image. I write fanfic. I had someone complain that one of my stories wasn't a romance (all the characters were male and I don't do slash). There wasn't the vaguest hint that might suggest to someone that it might possibly be a romance, but this person wanted it to be, and was angry that it wasn't. Just ignore 'em.

[Poppa1956]

As a Card-Carrying Member of the Religious Right, I've understood for some time that not only do many not share my views, in many venues the majority do not. I would say I've gotten over it, except I never felt an outrage over which I should get.
Perhaps Frankie thought the word "apocalyptic" suggested the book was along the lines of the Left Behind Series. Obviously, most people using the word apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic are not doing so with the intent of any direct Biblical reference.
As with any review, whether by a professional critic or otherwise, is the opinion of that individual.

[Donnageddon]

Donna if it gives you some reassurance, I just purchased New Coastal Times from smashwords, precisely because of that dimwits "negative" review.

Anything that upsets a member of the far right "christian" Taliban, must be good!

[banjobama]

The first review I did on my blog was a bad one. When I looked to see how people had gotten to my blog, I saw there was a link to it on kindleboards.com. I went there and the author of the book had started a thread about the bad review and how upset he was by it. In the review I had mentioned some positive things too and I tried to be nice (some people in the thread stood up for me) but the criticism was still unmistakable and pointed. I instantly felt like a horse's ass because the guy described the review as "a kick in the teeth." But I was glad that I did see it, and since then I try extra hard to be gentle when I have something bad to say. My point is sometimes people who write those kinds of reviews forget that an actual PERSON worked very hard and did their best on the book and is basically putting their child on display to the world.

People who don't frequent forums like this might assume that anyone with a book published is a millionaire and therefore doesn't have feelings, or whatever justification they can make to be mean. Maybe if you post a cordial reply to the review the person will realize that you aren't some faceless evil genius getting rich quick and trying your best to trick people into buying your stuff.

Of course, some people are just insensitive and rude. To hell with them. Obviously the vast majority of people that read your writing love it. Commence to feel warm and fuzzy.

[Donna Callea]

Thanks to everyone who posted for the input. It makes me feel better.

[Worldwalker]

Hey, I'm insensitive and rude! We curmudgeons need love too!

If a book is terrible, people have just as much right to say so -- and to say why -- as they do to praise it if it is great. Yes, an actual person worked hard on that book, but I guess I'm too old-school to judge on effort rather than results. If you hire a guy to fix your roof, and when he's done, despite how hard he worked, it leaks worse than it did before he started, will you be satisfied with the job he did? Is the hard work sufficient? Are you going to recommend him? Or are you going to warn off your family and friends, because no matter how hard he works, the roof still leaks?

Writing for publication isn't putting your child on display to the world; it's putting your commercial product on the market. Any writer who mistakes the former for the latter needs to restrict his or her writing to friendly literary journals, or perhaps passing around among close friends. The market treats books as commodities and writers as manufacturers, and that hard work is of no more importance than that of the people who worked equally hard on The Last Airbender, which is currently in single digits at Rotten Tomatoes.

There are two kinds of criticism. One is the "your book isn't what I wanted it to be" variety. The other is the "your book has flaws, and this is what they are" variety. Foolish writers either take both to heart or ignore both. Wise writers disregard the former and learn from the latter. Whether or not the reviewer was "gentle" about it should not matter in the least.

P.S. I just bought the book on the theory that anything that ticks off a religious whacko that much has to be worth reading.

[banjobama]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Hey, I'm insensitive and rude! We curmudgeons need love too!

If a book is terrible, people have just as much right to say so -- and to say why -- as they do to praise it if it is great. Yes, an actual person worked hard on that book, but I guess I'm too old-school to judge on effort rather than results. If you hire a guy to fix your roof, and when he's done, despite how hard he worked, it leaks worse than it did before he started, will you be satisfied with the job he did? Is the hard work sufficient? Are you going to recommend him? Or are you going to warn off your family and friends, because no matter how hard he works, the roof still leaks?

Writing for publication isn't putting your child on display to the world; it's putting your commercial product on the market. Any writer who mistakes the former for the latter needs to restrict his or her writing to friendly literary journals, or perhaps passing around among close friends. The market treats books as commodities and writers as manufacturers, and that hard work is of no more importance than that of the people who worked equally hard on The Last Airbender, which is currently in single digits at Rotten Tomatoes.

There are two kinds of criticism. One is the "your book isn't what I wanted it to be" variety. The other is the "your book has flaws, and this is what they are" variety. Foolish writers either take both to heart or ignore both. Wise writers disregard the former and learn from the latter. Whether or not the reviewer was "gentle" about it should not matter in the least.

P.S. I just bought the book on the theory that anything that ticks off a religious whacko that much has to be worth reading.

I do agree with you about judging on results and not effort, but if it's just as easy to tread carefully with criticism then why not do it? Something like the review the person wrote of the OP's book is not constructive in any way and it bothered her to see that. There's not much for her to learn from that review and I can see how it would be hard to disregard that kind of feedback unless a person had a naturally thick skin.

P.S. You aren't that rude. Try harder.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by banjobama

I do agree with you about judging on results and not effort, but if it's just as easy to tread carefully with criticism then why not do it? Something like the review the person wrote of the OP's book is not constructive in any way and it bothered her to see that. There's not much for her to learn from that review and I can see how it would be hard to disregard that kind of feedback unless a person had a naturally thick skin.

The review the OP got was one of the first variety: "Your book isn't what I wanted it to be." The review isn't worth the pixels it's displayed with. That's the kind where you mentally say "...and the horse you rode in on" and ignore them.

When you look at that review, you realize there are two possibilities: 1) Donna's book was a tract about global warming, and 2) Donna's book was not such a tract. If the first is true, then the problem is all on the reader's end; if he didn't do his due diligence on what he was buying (that's what blurbs, excerpts, other reviews, etc., are all about) then he's got nobody to blame but himself when he finds out it's not, in fact, end-times Christian fiction. Therefore, it can be safely disregarded as the prattle of a fool. On the other hand, if the latter is true, then the reader is clearly out of his tiny little mind. He's seeing what he wants to see, not what's actually on the page. Therefore, it can be safely disregarded as the raving of a lunatic. Either way, it's worthless and demonstrates the reader's flaws, not the writer's. It's not worth the glucose it takes to power a few brain cells to care about it.

As to why not tread carefully, simple: The first sort of review -- "your book wasn't what I wanted it to be, waaaah!" -- should never be written at all. You failed at buying a book that matched your interests, tough noogies, choose better next time. The second -- "here's what's wrong with this book" -- is about the book, not the author. No professional, whether they're an author or a roofer, should need to have comments on their work sugar-coated so their poor widdle feewings don't get hurt by someone saying that competence is, in fact, not optional. Personally, I'd be insulted by a reviewer who treated me like I was an emotionally fragile child who couldn't ever be told they'd made a mistake, at least not without plenty of praise to cushion the shock.

P.S. You aren't that rude. Try harder.

I'm not a nice person; I just play one on MobileRead.

[J. Strnad]

If you aren't offending someone, you aren't trying hard enough.

Who wants to read a book that doesn't have some kind of point of view, even if it's portrayed through the lens of a character? And just because I disagree with it, that doesn't necessarily mean I won't enjoy the book.

Yeah, the one-star reviews sting, but you have to just move on. You won't please everyone.

[GlennD]

It's amusing to see "tolerant" folks labelling this reviewer as a member of the "christian" taliban and a whacko. How open minded of you! There's lots of right-wing, conservative, Christian folks who are quite accepting of other world-views and belief systems. The fact this reader/reviewer is a Christian doesn't automatically make him/her a close minded bigot.

A review (at least in the context of Amazon's site) is an opinion and nothing more. As a right-wing-christian-taliban-whacko-nutjob myself, I'd probably ignore the poor review unless I happened to be looking specifically for a Christian-oriented end of times book, in which case it would be a relevant review. Then again, I'd look at the dozen or so 5 star reviews with nothing in between as an indication that perhaps readership hadn't yet spread beyond the author's friends and family. I tend to ignore the ultra-glowing reviews right along with the bile filled one star reviews. In this case there I find the 4 star reviews to be the most helpful.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by GlennD

There's lots of right-wing, conservative, Christian folks who are quite accepting of other world-views and belief systems.

Yes, there are. They are not the people who are labeled "Christian Taliban". That term (and please note that I was not the one who used it) is applied to the people who demonstrate complete intolerance of other people's beliefs: the minority (but a very vocal and politically active minority) who want to make the United States into a fundamentalist Christian theocracy.

The fact this reader/reviewer is a Christian doesn't automatically make him/her a close minded bigot.

Nope. Fortunately, nobody is saying that it does. That should save a lot of argument.

The fact that he blew up all over an author because he seems to expect that book, or maybe all books, to endorse his political/religious beliefs, on the other hand, is fairly significant.

Here's the description from Amazon:

As Hurricane Walter, the worst hurricane ever recorded (at least so far), reshapes the overdeveloped East Central Florida coast, swallows condos up whole, and ushers in a world-wide disaster-filled era spurred by global warming, Mia Gionfreddo Fine crouches in the crumbling newsroom of the (let's face it) crummy newspaper she works for, listening to the publisher sing Broadway show tunes.

Set in the near future (maybe tomorrow), NEW COASTAL TIMES is a seriocomic romp through a not-so-brave new world where religious fanatics wait for Jesus in the Okefenokee Swamp, martial law rules in the still existing cities, the government sets up free-love communes for displaced youth, and a group of intrepid travelers—including former so-so reporter Mia, her adorable dedicated doctor husband, his avuncular tenor mentor, a good-hearted baritone pimp, and the show-tune-singing publisher (an aging soprano) make their way from Florida to New York in the New Coastal TImes Performing Arts Center van. Because, when you get right down to it, there really is no place like home.

Now, when I read this, I do not see any indication that it might be a religious-themed book; in fact, the bit about religious fanatics in the swamp hints that it might be the opposite. I do, however, see -- in the part that I bolded -- a very strong indication that it's going to involve global warming and climate change.

Since it's pretty strongly indicated that this book is not part of the "Christian fiction" genre, assuming the reviewer wasn't simply too stupid to read or understand that description, he must think all books should endorse and promulgate his particular variety of Christianity. That's what makes him a appear to be a fanatic, and that's what people are reacting to.

[Over]

Amazon reviews are personal reviews. People write and score according to their tastes. It's not an objective review, nor the "reviewer" should try to write one that applies to everyone.

That reader felt offended or annoyed by, apparently, anti-christian trashing/rants in the book.

I didn't read the book, so I don't know if it's true, but it's good to know. There might be other people who think the same and won't want to read the book.

But there's other people who enjoyed it and gave 5 stars.

It's all a matter of tastes. When I brwse amazon for a new book, I don't care about the stars. I just look at them so that I can sample positive and negative reviews and then make my choice.

Don't be sad because of a bad review. Specially one that is drowned in the middle of positive reviews. There's will always be bad reviews, no matter how good the book.

[Over]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Yes, there are. They are not the people who are labeled "Christian Taliban". That term (and please note that I was not the one who used it) is applied to the people who demonstrate complete intolerance of other people's beliefs: the minority (but a very vocal and politically active minority) who want to make the United States into a fundamentalist Christian theocracy.


Nope. Fortunately, nobody is saying that it does. That should save a lot of argument.

The fact that he blew up all over an author because he seems to expect that book, or maybe all books, to endorse his political/religious beliefs, on the other hand, is fairly significant.

Here's the description from Amazon:

Now, when I read this, I do not see any indication that it might be a religious-themed book; in fact, the bit about religious fanatics in the swamp hints that it might be the opposite. I do, however, see -- in the part that I bolded -- a very strong indication that it's going to involve global warming and climate change.

Since it's pretty strongly indicated that this book is not part of the "Christian fiction" genre, assuming the reviewer wasn't simply too stupid to read or understand that description, he must think all books should endorse and promulgate his particular variety of Christianity. That's what makes him a appear to be a fanatic, and that's what people are reacting to.

I don't think the reviewer expected pro-religious propaganda, endorsement or whatever.
It looks like he was after fiction and not a lecture on global warming and religion.

[carld]

Originally Posted by Over

I don't think the reviewer expected pro-religious propaganda, endorsement or whatever.
It looks like he was after fiction and not a lecture on global warming and religion.

There's no indication to me that the book presents a "lecture on global warming and religion," either. I think the reviewer just didn't read the description very well.