But What I Really Want To Do Is Write

Today is November 1, which means it's once again time for NaNoWriMo. For those of you who think I'm talking more nonsense than usual, that stands for National Novel Writing Month. The goal is to crank out a 50,000 word novel during the month of November.

During my general blog surfing, I'm always surprised by how many reader bloggers turn out to be aspiring authors. Naturally, several of them are going to be participating in NaNoWriMo.

I'll admit it, I'm a little touchy on this subject of reader/reviewer/aspiring author. You have to look at my history. Back when I landed in the online romance community (back when dinosaurs walked the Earth) - you had three major sources for romance novel reviews. The Romance Reader, All About Romance, and Mrs. Giggles. Certainly other sites joined in later - but those were really The Big Three. What separated TRR, AAR and Mrs. G from the print publications that reviewed romance (and really, there weren't that many of those either) were that all three would occasionally ::gasp:: not care for a book. Unfavorable reviews happened.

This was a foreign concept for a lot of authors, and naturally some of them weren't happy. Mud-slinging commenced. These sites were accused of enjoying "slash-and-burn" style reviews. All we did was nit-pick stories to death. Which was a bunch of horse-hooey. As a former TRR reviewer I can tell you I wrote way more favorable reviews (A, B, C grades or 5, 4 and 3 Hearts) than I ever did unfavorable (D and F or 2 and 1 Hearts). But the perception was that we had it "out" for romance writers. This naturally brought up that old charge that all of us were a bunch of jealous, nasty biddies who ripped apart "good" books because we were "frustrated would-be wannabe writers." Since our crap manuscripts had no doubt been soundly rejected all over New York, we decided to build up our little egos by shredding the work of more talented and published writers.

Sigh.

Sadly, this bit of nonsense still gets tossed around to this day - only this time the targets include not only "old guard" reviewers, but fairly new on the scene bloggers as well.

Now certainly I'm not saying there is anything wrong with reader bloggers being aspiring writers. What I am saying is that not all reader bloggers have that desire or aspiration. Some of us, truly, have no desire to write. Of which I am one.

I've long said that if I ever were crazy enough to try my hand at writing a book, romance would be the very last genre I would pick. Why? Because hot damn, all that emotional "stuff" is damn hard to write! And then you have to make it believable! Holy mother - no way in heck could I do that. Nope. If I were going to write, I'd pick a crime novel (because I'm blood-thirsty) or straight-up erotica (because I'm a deviant). But not a romance. I don't have it in me.

This all being said, I don't really want to write. Besides the fact it's hard, I lack a little thing called desire. When you write, you have to want it. You have to work for it. You have to sit your ass in the chair, and write. You have to write when you don't feel like it. Write when the words won't come easy. Write when you'd rather have bamboo shoots shoved underneath your fingernails. It's hard work. Hell, if it wasn't hard every John and Janie Yokel would fancy themselves being able to do it.

And actually, some of them do. Take it from the librarian who routinely receives unsolicited, self-published "manifestos." ::shudder::

So for those of you out there with aspirations to one day be published - I salute you. It's hard work. I appreciate that it's hard work. Which is why I don't do it. That, and the fact that I lack a little thing called talent. And drive. And anything remotely resembling ambition.

How many of you blog and are aspiring writers? How many of you blogged as aspiring writers and have since been published? And how many of you are like me and have no aspirations whatsoever?

Objectivity In The Age Of Twitter

What I've always found so interesting about the romance genre is the connection that readers share with the authors. Even back in The Dark Ages, it was pretty easy to send "fan letters" to authors. To this day when I crack open a book from the early 1990s, I often find a PO Box address listed at the end of the author bio.

Then the Internet happened. Authors got web sites and e-mail and it got even easier for readers to "mingle" with authors. Now in the age of social networking? Forget about it. It's a free-for-all.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Let's be honest here. Pretty much everyone outside of the genre tends to scoff at romance. It's poorly written crap. The authors are making money churning out Mad-Libs style books. The readers are idiots happily lapping up simplistic drivel. Lather, rinse, repeat. When you have that kind of scorn directed at you from "the outside," you're naturally going to look for approval from "the inside." So romance authors and readers have banded together as a clan, of sorts. It's pretty cool actually.

Where it gets sticky for me is when we talk objectivity. The line started blurring the moment the online romance community was born, and now in an age where anyone can start their own blog, it's gotten really murky. I'm all for everyone and anyone to start blogging (the more the merrier I say!), but when it comes to reviews and promotion, it's throwing a wrench in the works.

I'm a bit of a cynic at heart, but when I see an author and reader Tweeting each other, commenting on each others' blogs, and then I see the reader post an A+++ (squeeeee!) review for the author's latest book? Yeah. Doubting Thomas at 5 o'clock.

OK, so I'm a bitch.

And a hypocrite.

There are authors who comment on this blog. And authors who I follow on Twitter. Over the years I've unabashedly championed some authors (Maggie Osborne and Portia Da Costa coming to mind). So what makes me think I'm "different."

I'm not really. I'm a fan. An unabashed fan. What it all boils down to is objectivity. I've been accused of being "too hard" on books and being "hard-hearted." That last one, I hope, jokingly. But for me? The author is not their book. There are countless authors I have "met" (in person and virtually) over the years who I think are wonderful, beautiful, incredible, lovely human beings.

But I can't stand their books.

Do I feel like a shit-heel for it? Yeah. For about half a minute. And then I move on. Because my not liking a book is just that - me not liking it. Doesn't mean countless other people out there won't love the book and want to have babies with it. It's just that I don't. Also it doesn't mean I won't buy the book for work. Hell, my job is all about objectivity. Otherwise I'd never buy another Danielle Steel book as long as I live.

I think most authors are grown-ups and "get it." Maggie Osborne is retired, so she probably doesn't give a hoot that some crazy librarian fangirl didn't care for The Stranger's Wife or Shotgun Wedding. Portia Da Costa still talks to me even though I wasn't wild about one of her Spice Briefs short stories for Harlequin. Heck, Jennifer Lyon still acknowledges my existence despite me whining about her leaving behind mysteries (which I really liked!) to write paranormals.

Do I feel like crap when I meet an author in person and I gave one of their books a "negative" review? Yeah. I feel like shit. But I know it's a business, they know it's a business, and in the grand scheme of things, is my one less-than-enthusiastic review of their book going to ruin their lives? Highly unlikely. I don't have, or want, that kind of power.

Although if I did have that kind of power, just think what I could do for historical westerns?

Ultimately it comes down to the reader/blogger being honest with themselves. If they recognize that remaining objective is "hard" for them, maybe they need to decide what they want more. Mingling with authors via social networking or reviewing their books for a blog? I don't think being a fangirl is necessarily a bad thing (well, unless you're crazy - then that's no good), but own it. Admit it. Revel in it. Be upfront about it. Because I want honest reviews giving me good, solid information about the book. If your honest opinion is "Squeeeeee I love everything this author has written - including all the doormat heroines, 'man roots,' 'love grottos,' and asshole Alpha jerks who rape the heroine until she falls in love with him" then so be it. But own it.

Don't pass yourself off as being objective when you aren't. Because frankly, that sucks.

This is a constantly evolving issue, and one that I think quite a few reader bloggers struggle with. I also don't think it's going to let up anytime soon. Especially since so many aspiring author bloggers who have had feet in both Author and Reader blogging worlds are now starting to get publishing contracts.

Stay tuned for further developments.

Cold Hard Bitch

I was having a discussion recently with a fellow blogger who posed this question:

Can you review a book you didn't like if you "know" the author?

This is a question I think a lot of reader bloggers struggle with, because first and foremost, we're fans. We love the genre. We love to support authors. We love to talk books. And some people just find it hard to slam a book they hated after they've met the author who is just the sweetest person on the planet, dontcha know.

Me? I don't have this problem. To which this fellow blogger mused (jokingly) that I was hard-hearted.

I'm not, I just have my own code of ethics. Let me try to explain.

I've always been able to separate The Book from The Author. In fact, I prefer it this way. I hate when lines are blurred - which is why I tend to get annoyed with freaky rabid fangirl behavior. I like my reality in one box, and my entertainment (fiction) in another box. They can be in the same storage unit, but that's about it. For me the book is a commodity. It's a product that one buys and consumes - sorta like a loaf of bread. Certainly books can enrich my life, but like a loaf of bread, I don't always like every brand that's on the market.

Another thing (and this is worth repeating): The Book Is Not The Author. I even think that some authors tend to forget this. Calling the book "her baby." Railing against ignorant reviewers. Posting on reader blogs that the reader was just "too stupid" to understand how beautiful the author's "baby" was.

Puhleeze

I know writing a book is hard work. If it wasn't hard work, everybody would do it. But let's keep it in perspective shall we? Raising a child is one thing, writing a book another entirely. I'm sorry, they ain't on the same level and you won't be able to convince me otherwise (code for: don't even try).

Does that mean I am without any tact whatsoever?

Hell no. I do have my rules.

For instance, I'm all for posting on my blog about how much I hated a book - but I'm talking about the book. I'll say the heroine was an idiot, the hero was a Neanderthal, there were plot holes you could drive a truck through, and was the cutesy toddler with a lisp really necessary? Notice there's not one single mention of the author here?

Also, while I'm all for spewing forth my loathing on my forum, I would never, ever, ever e-mail an author personally and say, "Cripes, you're a hack. This book sucked, you can't write worth a damn and oh, by the way, your feet stink." This is just rude behavior in my opinion. My forum is one thing. The author has to do the work to find me. Showing up at their house? Another entirely. This includes author blogs, author message boards or any other forum run by said author. These sort of promotional tools tend to be very fan oriented anyway, and personally I don't go out of my way looking for flame wars. That's me though.

Likewise, if I've read an author's book(s) and hated it, then meet said author I never say, "Hello, I'm a reviewer and I thought your last book sucked donkey balls." In fact, I tend to never mention I'm a reviewer, period. I just don't. A lot of authors aren't wild about "us", and again (being a wuss), I like to avoid uncomfortable moments when humanly possible. That, and I get a lot more love by saying, "Hello, I'm a librarian." Seriously, everybody loves librarians.

Do I feel guilty giving a crappy review to an author I've met before? Certainly. I love to go to booksignings, so it's happened more than once to me. I read a book, hated the book, meet the author and she's so bloody nice! I feel like a shit-heel for a while, but I get over it. Again, The Book Is Not The Author.

But I'm hard-hearted like that.

After a lengthy sabbatical I'm going to be dipping my toes back in the reviewing waters. I had wicked case of burn out towards the end of 2002 and desperately needed some time off. I had been reviewing steadily for The Romance Reader, and the sister site - The Mystery Reader, since 1999 with only the occasional short breaks in between. After over 160 reviews - some glowing, some dismal - I needed a rest.

While my time away has been enjoyable, I do miss the exposure to new authors and books that reviewing tends to bring. TRR's editor has sent me some real gems over the years - most notably books by Kathleen Eschenburg, Susan Wiggs, and Susan Grant. I probably would have gotten around to Eschenburg and Wiggs on my own - but it's doubtful I would have stumbled into Grant's territory since she writes paranormal romance - a sub genre that I do not actively seek out on my own.

I've long admired the concept of TRR mainly because print review publications tend to largely ignore romance - even though it is the highest selling genre of fiction. Whether this is due to the fact that romance is mainly still published in mass market paperback form, or pure snobbiness is hard to say. I say it's a little bit of both - althouth it still amazes me the depth of disdain romance seems to induce in the literary community - including librarians.

I've long stood by my enjoyment of popular fiction - be it romance or mystery - mainly because I enjoy it so darn much. I do take life seriously, I do work hard - but honestly my idea of unwinding does not involve reading a book about miserable people, living miserable lives, and treating everyone who enters their world miserably.

But I'm just a mild-mannered librarian - what do I know?