Author Throws Tantrum, Curses out Reviewer

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by spellbanisher

*snip*

<Dan Brown excerpts critiqued>

*snip*

I'm by no means defending Brown's writing skills (I couldn't), but... it can't be healthy to spend that much time, energy and research pointing out why you don't like something. Put it down, don't buy any more and move on. Drivel gets written and read everyday without the sky falling.

[kacir]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Check out her (third person) self-description on her Facebook page:

Well, English is my third language (used to be fourth) and I believe I could write more coherent description with fewer spelling mistakes *with the spell checker switched off* ;-)

[spellbanisher]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'm by no means defending Brown's writing skills (I couldn't), but... it can't be healthy to spend that much time, energy and research pointing out why you don't like something. Put it down, don't buy any more and move on. Drivel gets written and read everyday without the sky falling.

I didn't search it out; I like reading the language log. As far as the writer of this critique, I think it is his job, so if he is paid to do it why not. Plus, the reviewer is discussing a disturbing trend in general (not in the quote) about what he calls "The Dan Brown Code," which says that all thriller writers must praise each others works.

Here's two subsequent paragraphs that I didn't quote:

"I don't think I'd want to say these things about a first-time novelist, it would seem a cruel blow to a budding career. But Dan Brown is all over the best-seller lists now. In paperback and hardback, and in many languages, he is a phenomenon. He is up there with the Stephen Kings and the John Grishams and nothing I say can conceivably harm him. He is a huge, blockbuster, worldwide success who can go anywhere he wants and need never work again. And he writes like the kind of freshman student who makes you want to give up the whole idea of teaching. Never mind the ridiculous plot and the stupid anagrams and puzzle clues as the book proceeds, this is a terrible, terrible example of the thriller-writer's craft.

Which brings us to the question of the blurbs. "Dan Brown has to be one of the best, smartest, and most accomplished writers in the country," said Nelson DeMille, a bestselling author who has himself hit the #1 spot in the New York Times list. Unbelievable mendacity. And there are four other similar pieces of praise on the back cover. Together those blurbs convinced me to put this piece of garbage on the CostCo cart along with the the 72-pack of toilet rolls. Thriller writers must have a code of honor that requires that they all praise each other's new novels, a kind of omerta that enjoins them to silence about the fact that some fellow member of the guild has given evidence of total stylistic cluelessness. A fraternal code of silence. We could call it... the Da Vinci code; or the Dan Brown code."

[Littermate]

I giggled a bit when I first read the blog comments but now I just feel a bit queasy about it. People are just having fun jumping on her for no reason other than they enjoy it. No compassion. No self restraint. No worth or point to any of the gloating comments or 1 star reviews. There was a post on the original blog which I quote below...

<Quote>

"Anonymous said:

I don't see how coming onto a blog to gloat or laugh about someone having a public emotional meltdown is better behaviour than having an over-emotional meltdown.

Humans suck."

It isn't better. Arguably, it's worse. It's why people are posting as anonymous. Because then they don't need to show humility or a modicum of compassion.

For everyone revelling in this -- a quick story. I had something similar happen with a colleague who ranted and swore at me. Face to face. When I took him aside in private he broke down and admitted his father had just died the night before. Me pointing an error out to him had been the final straw.

Please don't forget that behind an easy laugh is a real person. And you've no idea who she is or what might have prompted her behaviour.

It doesn't excuse her. But it doesn't excuse you either.

</Quote>

Leave her alone now. She's probably depressed enough.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by kacir

Well, English is my third language (used to be fourth) and I believe I could write more coherent description with fewer spelling mistakes *with the spell checker switched off* ;-)

has it occurred to anyone that she is not a native speaker of English? I know many posters on these forums do an overwhelming job of handling English as a 2nd, 3rd, 4th.... language, but every error I have seen thus far certainly seems to be that of a non-native speaker.

of course this then opens up the whole... did you have an editor? issue...

[netseeker]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

has it occurred to anyone that she is not a native speaker of English?

She is a native (british) english speaker.

[bZkindle]

ha! this is one classic meltdown.
"my writing is great!"
hubris much?

[HansTWN]

Since she is for real, we can only give her one final word of advice -- shut up and get a decent editor, lady!

[Richard Herley]

I think she may deserve a bit less abuse. Her behaviour isn't rational. For an analogous example, check out the story of Mary Bale -- the woman who achieved global fame for putting a cat in a wheelie-bin.

Any normal author knows the drill when it comes to reviews: be thankful for positive ones, and say nowt about the others. Complaining just makes you look silly and makes the inkblot bigger.

I had a peep at Jackie's blog and, yep, she doesn't seem rational to me.

[bZkindle]

this reminds me a lot of Time magazine writer Alex Perry unwisely choosing to blow out in the comment section on Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting after being criticized for an article on the Congo:

http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/06/25/...art-should-be/

I'd have to say that this is even more entertaining, though perhaps a little less pathetic.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by Littermate

I giggled a bit when I first read the blog comments but now I just feel a bit queasy about it.

I'm not sure if it was in this thread or the other one (the topic has spawned two) but that has been said, several times. The same impulse that led you to say it -- wanting to respond to people without regard to fellow posters' responses -- is what motivated the various people to respond to the angry author. In other words, they weren't joining with the other posters of the same thing; they were disregarding them completely, and would have posted what they did whether 300 or 30 or 3 people had posted before them. That's the nature of the modern Internet, as you can see in any comment area: people shouting but not listening. They don't think "someone else already said what I want to say; I don't need to bother". They say "I want to say this-and-that" and they do, without taking anyone else's posts into consideration. I've called it the Facebook phenomenon -- millions of people shouting and nobody listening. It's conversation as a one-way process.

As for the one-star Amazon reviews, while I don't agree with that, I do understand why people are doing it: she trotted out the Amazon reviews left by her friends and family as "proof" that there is nothing wrong with her writing. Since she said "I'm good because my three Amazon reviews said this" there are people who are going to say "no you're not because your Amazon reviews said that" and post accordingly. (the fact that she's gotten several family members to post 5-star "reviews" doesn't help in the slightest) And when she demanded, very forcefully (and with insults) that the blog's owner remove his review because it wasn't glowing, that threw every positive review she's ever gotten into question as well.

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

has it occurred to anyone that she is not a native speaker of English?

She claims to be a native speaker. She's British. (early on, one of her excuses for her bad writing was that Americans don't understand British humor) So, yes, it occurred, but was quickly dismissed.

But that's not the issue. Her bad writing is just grounds for a poor review. Her attitude -- her belligerence, her refusal to admit obvious mistakes, and especially her cursing out the reviewer and other posters -- is the issue, and the rather vigorous public response was to that. Writing in your second language doesn't turn you into a jerk. Also, when I post something in a language not my first, I not only don't curse at people who correct my errors, I thank them profusely. I don't insist that there are no errors. I'm somewhat more arrogant about English: I think I tend to get it right. But even so, if someone points out an error in my writing, I check it. If it's wrong, I fix it. That's what trying for my personal best (I can't be the best, but I can be my best) is all about. I don't think I'm already the best that can be ... and this author, apparently, does.

Basically, she did an Anne Rice, but ten times worse, and without a tenth of Ms. Rice's talent. That doesn't go over well with readers.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

has it occurred to anyone that she is not a native speaker of English? I know many posters on these forums do an overwhelming job of handling English as a 2nd, 3rd, 4th.... language, but every error I have seen thus far certainly seems to be that of a non-native speaker.

of course this then opens up the whole... did you have an editor? issue...

I agree that the errors are those of a nonnative English speaker. And I also agree that this raises the question of whether or not she had a professional editor. The difficulties in dealing with a nonnative speaker's communications skills really do require professional assistance rather than the assistance of the dabbler.

But . . . I also do think many (far from all) the criticisms of the author are valid. After all, she is trying to sell her book. I know I would be angry, and on far too many occasions have been angry, that I had paid for a very poorly written book.

What I find interesting -- generally, not in this particular instance -- is how many people either are not bothered by poor writing or do not recognize poor writing. I have met and know authors who are unable (or unwilling) to make the leap from the grammar and spelling of Tweeter to that of literature; they transfer their Tweeter language to their literary endeavors. The decline in grammar education in American public schools is worrisome but the cause is obvious. Those who should be demanding higher writing standards are unable to climb that mountain themselves. Consequently, they accept as the benchmark anything that rises close to what they misperceive as their own extraordinary skill level. Ultimately, all of society suffers.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by netseeker

She is a native (british) english speaker.

If so, then it doesn't speak well of British education. In fact, it implies that it is mimicking American education -- low standards for all, high standards for none.

[elcreative]

Don't judge a group by one person... just because this person escaped, without the rudiments of a decent education, doesn't mean all do so...

Originally Posted by rhadin

If so, then it doesn't speak well of British education. In fact, it implies that it is mimicking American education -- low standards for all, high standards for none.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Richard Herley

I think she may deserve a bit less abuse. Her behaviour isn't rational. . . I had a peep at Jackie's blog and, yep, she doesn't seem rational to me.

Love that word rational. It and its companion irrational are tossed about as conclusions but without definition. The implication is psychological disorder, but without ever really saying so or defining which disorder.

I'm not sure how one can conclude she is rational or irrational. Is it rational, for example, to pay millions of dollars for an oversized painting of a soup can when you can get the real thing for less than a dollar at your grocer?

I find the ease with which we use these words as covers for things we don't want to say pointedly troublesome -- it is the calling-a-rose-by-another-name syndrome .