Author Throws Tantrum, Curses out Reviewer

I can understand how difficult it can be for a book author to gracefully accept criticism of her 'baby.' This hilarious exchange illustrates how to go completely wrong with responding though. All the more so since the criticism was over her grammar and spelling. While other potential criticisms of an author's work may be open to debate, that deficiency is cut and dried. Especially since the reviewer was able to pull examples of poor grammar right out of her text. She then compounded things by exhibiting even worse English in her blog posts, capping things off with telling numerous critics to go f*** themselves.

Adopting a Sarah Palin “Don't retreat reload” strategy may be good for the ego, but is bad for an author wishing to be taken seriously.

So anyway that's my opinion. I refudiate any claims that I am in error or that I have ever made any spelling or grammar errors in any of my posts. Shakespeare made up words too, you betch ya.

[Worldwalker]

I see the same thing all the time from fanfic writers: they insist their writing is awesome when it makes the reader cringe, or they demand adulation for the mere fact of writing, with no requirement for it to actually be good writing, and go ballistic when someone dares to suggest that anyone can write, and praise should be reserved for those who write well. Given that self-publishing, especially in electronic form, is little more than fanfic without the "fan-", I suppose it's only to be expected that the same attitudes will surface.

I think the biggest problem is authors who can't separate themselves from their writing. They see their writing as part of themselves. They see sharing it as having a one-on-one conversation with their best friend (or, as suggested elsewhere, their therapist). A collision of expectations ensues when readers see their writing as a commercial product, expected to meet certain standards of merchantability and usability, and if it doesn't, they react as they would if they bought a broken chair.

If you're writing for money, you're producing a commercial product, just exactly as if you were selling chairs. If you want to give a few chairs to your friends at Christmas, they can be as defective as you like -- it's a cultural norm not to criticize gifts, especially handmade ones, from friends and relatives (though I did unload that hideous clock at a yard sale). But if you're trying to sell your chairs, you have to research the market, produce what people want to buy, meet certain standards of quality, and make it good or make it right. Somehow, certain writers feel they're exempt from this. They're not.

Usually, it's the amateurs -- that's why the attitude is so prevalent in fanfiction. But not always. Along with the famous Anne Rice rant, there's Laurell K. Hamilton's even more unhinged tirade (where, among other things, she admits her characters are her imaginary friends). There are clearly cases where this whole "access to the audience" thing makes authorial misbehavior a little too easy -- an author can make a fool of themself in public with no editor to ask "my dear, is this really what you want to say?"

To some extent, science fiction readers have lived in this world for a long time -- SF writers have long been judged, not only on the quality of their work, but on their behavior at SF conventions. But that's still a one-on-one thing, and people tend to be more restrained when they can see the face of (or risk a punch from) the person they're interacting with. Now all authors, not just SF authors, can speak directly to their readers, and to all, not just the convention-attending part, of their readership. I think it's going to take society some time to work in the fact that writers tend to be, um, different. It takes a certain mentality to be a machinist, a landscaper, or a teacher, and it takes a certain mentality to be a writer. Actually, I think it takes one of several certain mentalities to be a writer, and one of those possibilities is seeing writing as a way of making the voices in one's head a little more real. Combine that with unfettered access to the whole wide world, and you get ... this.

[queentess]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

I think the biggest problem is authors who can't separate themselves from their writing. They see their writing as part of themselves. They see sharing it as having a one-on-one conversation with their best friend (or, as suggested elsewhere, their therapist). A collision of expectations ensues when readers see their writing as a commercial product, expected to meet certain standards of merchantability and usability, and if it doesn't, they react as they would if they bought a broken chair.

[...]Somehow, certain writers feel they're exempt from this. They're not.

I think it's the writers who call it "art" who feel they are exempt. After all, who can judge art? Yes, but it's also commercial product, and readers expect certain things (like proper grammar). If a writer wants to make money writing, they have to be able to accept criticism from the masses. Liking or hating a book is still very subjective (storytelling certainly is an art form), so people will hate your book for the same reason another person liked it.

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Actually, I think it takes one of several certain mentalities to be a writer, and one of those possibilities is seeing writing as a way of making the voices in one's head a little more real. Combine that with unfettered access to the whole wide world, and you get ... this.

Absolutely. That's where the Laurell K. Hamilton's of the world come in. I've read part of her outburst (and Diana Gabaldon's), and I didn't think they were that crazy. Just creative people being... well, creative people. Trying to explain why they do what they do, and why they think what they think. You can disagree all you want with their opinions, but I don't think they sound like crazy people in context. Bad analogies, sure.

[Worldwalker]

I'm a creative person, or at least I like to think I am. I don't believe that my fictional characters are my imaginary friends, though. When you start buying gifts for your imaginary friends, you are that crazy.

[queentess]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

I'm a creative person, or at least I like to think I am. I don't believe that my fictional characters are my imaginary friends, though. When you start buying gifts for your imaginary friends, you are that crazy.

I understand the whole "imaginary friends" thing -- it would make it easier to write the character if you imagine it as a 'real' person. But gifts?! I must not have read that far

[spellbanisher]

I don't think the tantrum will be detrimental to her prospects. What will be detrimental is her inability to take criticism, especially considering that her writing has objective flaws like poor grammar and word usage. As an author she should constantly trying to improve her writing, but this rant indicates that she believes she is beyond reproach.

The attitude of many authors, especially self-published ones, reminds me of American Idol auditions. Someone comes in, sings terribly, is told that she is terrible, she tells the judges that they don't know what they are talking about, that they'll regret this decision, and then she storms off, screaming to the camera that she will be famous someday. In a way she ends up right about the fame, just not for the reasons she thought they would be.

[elizilla]

I would not be surprised if this tempest is improving her sales, at least in the short term. Some people are going to want to join the pile-on, but will feel that it's not fair to do it unless they read the book, so they'll pick it up. Whereas without this tantrum, no one would ever have noticed the book; it would sink into the slush pile. I can't imagine it will help her, long term, though.

[Worldwalker]

From the excerpts I've seen, not a lot of people are going to finish the book, even if they buy it to see what all the fuss is about. Very few authors get by on the sales of just one book. That's why series are so popular: a built-in audience for the next book. While some might start the book out of morbid curiosity, finishing the book is a prerequisite for wanting the next book from the same author, and wanting another book is necessary for further sales. People are going to remember her name, certainly, but not in the way she wants them to.

Also, if she ever wanted to leave self-publishing, she's shot her chance. Imagine you're an agent. There are more people hammering on your door (or your email) for you to represent them than you have time for. All other things (and manuscripts) being equal, do you pick the nice, polite, friendly person? Or do you pick the one who's already proven that she goes ballistic at bad reviews, can't recognize her own mistakes, and swears at random blog posters? Why risk an ulcer when there's someone hawking a manuscript that's just as good who has no track record of misbehavior? Agents remember these things. Agents talk to each other. So do publishers. There are good, recognized, profitable authors who struggle with publication because they've poisoned their own well in one way or another -- and she's not even that good.

The first step to getting better than you are at anything, not just writing, is to recognize that you're not already the best. You can't do anything without recognizing that you need to do it. But "...what I read above has no flaws" and "My writing is fine" (especially when referring to examples that would draw scoffs, or maybe baffled looks, in MobileRead posts) amounts to failing before you begin. And it's going to be that, not her fifteen minutes of Internet fame, that people remember.

For those who haven't read anything she's written, I refer you to her self-written Amazon blurb. No matter how one might argue about whether "your visit the ports" is correct English or not, the aquatic mammals are not dolpins, and any spelling checker would have pointed that out to her. But even in the writing that will provide her first impression on people who don't know here, she's too arrogant and sure of herself to even use a spelling checker, let alone a proofreader.

It is, I suppose, Art. But there's a reason there's a Museum of Bad Art, and why we think the Mona Lisa is a work for the ages and Thomas Kincade collector's plates are a work for the Franklin Mint.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

For those who haven't read anything she's written, I refer you to her self-written Amazon blurb. No matter how one might argue about whether "your visit the ports" is correct English or not, the aquatic mammals are not dolpins, and any spelling checker would have pointed that out to her. But even in the writing that will provide her first impression on people who don't know here, she's too arrogant and sure of herself to even use a spelling checker, let alone a proofreader.

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

Welcome Readers, authors, reviewers, poets, musicians, movie producers, artist and art dealers.
Leave your links here, or the blog or e-mail me privately. My blogs now up and I hope to become more inovative over the next few months.

Jacqueline Howett is a novelist and poet. She also writes plays, short stories, micro fiction, articles, childrens books still forthcoming, novellas and is known to compose Greek poetry in translation. Her poetry book, Amorphous Angelic, is now a kindle amazon ebook for 99 cents and has been published at book stores, Borders, Amazon and from her own website and can be picked up at some libraries. A video reading of poetry from the book Amorphous Angelic is now up on You Tube and the blog and here on Facebook along with a video excerpt from the novel The Greek Seaman in her British accent.
Her novel, The Greek Seaman is finally here after so many years in the making, and is now available as an eBook from Amazon - Kindle, for $2.99. and from Smashwords in various formats. Jacqueline served as online editor in the late nineties through to 2001 promoting an Authors, Artist, Poets and Musicians Spotlight at her sites ATLinkswith and ATLinkswithPoetry.

Her next novel, Cass, she hopes to publish by winter 2011. More recently, Jacqueline has published a micro fiction piece in Alien Skin Magazine in the May/June issue 2010, and some newer poems in Long Story Short Magazine in the Sept/Oct/Nov/ issues 2010 and in the February issue 2011. Jacqueline's first two novels take place in Europe and took twelve years to complete. Her third novel is now in first draft and takes place in America. To view more on her bio click on the website or read the blog. Jacqueline is also an artist.

Jacqueline also hopes to bring forth two more poetry books in her process, titled, Sands Of Time and My Greek Side. Jacqueline has just created the book cover to Sands Of Time.

Born and educated in London, England. She has lived for a time in Paris, France and Greece and now lives in the USA.

I was a big traveler in my time before settling in the USA. I have seen quite a lot of the world since a child, mostly just around Europe and to Greece and then later Africa, Turkey, Lebanon, Israel, Egypt, Libya and Mexico.

http://www.facebook.com/jacqueline.howett

[queentess]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

It is, I suppose, Art. But there's a reason there's a Museum of Bad Art, and why we think the Mona Lisa is a work for the ages and Thomas Kincade collector's plates are a work for the Franklin Mint.

And then there's the Museum of Bad But Still Popular Art, which includes the likes of Dan Brown, Stephanie Meyer and Piers Anthony...

[queentess]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Jacqueline also hopes to bring forth two more poetry books in her process, titled, Sands Of Time and My Greek Side. Jacqueline has just created the book cover to Sands Of Time.

The flip-flopping from first to third is irritating...

If I'm reading this right, she created the book cover and gave it a title before the book is written??? Is that common?

[Worldwalker]

I've written titles that still need stories to attach to them, so I wouldn't say it's impossible, anyway. Whatever works for inspiration. (I sure as hell wouldn't admit it in public, though)

[ardeegee]

http://www.youtube.com/user/jacqswor.../0/5ou_oOGuDBw

[OtterBooks]

I believe this woman was hired by the big publishers as a PR scheme.

[spellbanisher]

Originally Posted by queentess

And then there's the Museum of Bad But Still Popular Art, which includes the likes of Dan Brown, Stephanie Meyer and Piers Anthony...

So there's hope for her yet! After all, you won't find a worst writer than Dan Brown, and look how successful he is. I posted this elsewhere, but I think its worth posting again.

From the Da Vinci Code:

A voice spoke, chillingly close. "Do not move."

On his hands and knees, the curator froze, turning his head slowly.



Only fifteen feet away, outside the sealed gate, the mountainous silhouette of his attacker stared through the iron bars. He was broad and tall, with ghost-pale skin and thinning white hair. His irises were pink with dark red pupils.

From the Language Log: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/langu...es/000844.html

"Just count the infelicities here. A voice doesn't speak —a person speaks; a voice is what a person speaks with. "Chillingly close" would be right in your ear, whereas this voice is fifteen feet away behind the thundering gate. The curator (do we really need to be told his profession a third time?) cannot slowly turn his head if he has frozen; freezing (as a voluntary human action) means temporarily ceasing all muscular movements. And crucially, a silhouette does not stare! A silhouette is a shadow. If Saunière can see the man's pale skin, thinning hair, iris color, and red pupils (all at fifteen feet), the man cannot possibly be in silhouette.

Brown's writing is not just bad; it is staggeringly, clumsily, thoughtlessly, almost ingeniously bad. In some passages scarcely a word or phrase seems to have been carefully selected or compared with alternatives. I slogged through 454 pages of this syntactic swill, and it never gets much better. Why did I keep reading? Because London Heathrow is a long way from San Francisco International, and airline magazines are thin, and two-month-old Hollywood drivel on a small screen hanging two seats in front of my row did not appeal, that's why. And why did I keep the book instead of dropping it into a Heathrow trash bin? Because it seemed to me to be such a fund of lessons in how not to write."