I  don’t usually stray too much from my usual reviews and memes, but I’ve  been reading something recently which has me really want to write this.     One of the blogs I follow, Jawas Read Too, recently had something  happen which I found pretty thought-provoking.   Erika consistently  posts what I feel are well-written reviews of books.  Sometimes, I admit  that after I read one of her reviews, I might feel that a book might  not sound like an interesting read (for me, personally).  This isn’t  necessarily because she gives a bad review --- it’s usually because the  book just doesn’t sound like my cup of tea.  However, I consistently  find that her reviews are fair and balanced (which is why I read her  blog).
The other day, however, something happened on her blog.   She had posted a review of a new book, The Marbury Lens by Andrew Smith.   In her post, she mentioned that “I  made a list of words to describe how I felt when reading The Marbury  Lens: uncomfortable, disturbed, ill, unsettled, offended. It was a  difficult book to read and this has been a difficult review to write  because I don’t think this book was necessarily bad. The jacket copy  mentions a pair of glasses and a different world, an English girl, and  war-torn Marbury. All of these are included, but there is so much that  fills the spaces between that still haunt me now, days after finishing,  and not in a good way.”  She  went on to describe how she really didn’t care for how one of the  characters chose to express himself, and found that because of her  dislike, the books just wasn’t that enjoyable of a read for her.  Now  this would seem like a pretty harmless thing to say, right?   Well,  one of the statements Erika made about this particular character, was  that he used a lot of what  seemed to be very homophobic phrases --  She  didn’t say the character was  homophobic, but that the phrases he used, and his attitude towards the  phrases (which the character used jokingly), and thus, the way he chose  to express himself, made her uncomfortable.   She  mentioned in her review that because she had read an ARC of this book  and that she would refrain from including direct quotes from the book to  support how she felt about this character.  This isn’t unusual; many ARCs have a request for reviewers to not quote directly, as the ARC is not a finished product.  But --please note here:  she stated that it was this character, and this character’s behavior  that she found repugnant.   This will become more important in a moment.
She concluded her review with this statement:  “There  is no question that Smith has written a book that will stand out among  its contemporaries. It was just not the best fit for me.”  And  then, things started to happen in the comments section.....     Some  people started to accuse Erika of writing a review that implied that the  author of this book was homophobic.   One person stated right out that  Andrew Smith is pro-gay, and for Erika to get her facts straight.  And  then it got more heated.  Another author started to post comments,  challenging Erika’s assertions in her post, and saying that unless Erika  had evidence that a writer is “gay-bashing,” that she should avoid the  insinuation.   To which, Erika responded that she went back and re-read  what she had written, and while she understood that perhaps she had not  worded things clearly, she saw “a person uncomfortable with a character, not the author.”
You  would think this would stop the comments.  But it didn’t.  People  started to snip at each other, snip at Erika, and really took everything  in a nasty direction.  It seemed like rather than read a post or  comment, digest, and then comment, people were just reacting.   I had posted my own comment initially about the fact that I had  ordered this book for our library, and was crossing my fingers that  readers would like the book.  Someone else read my comment and reacted  by saying that Erika’s review was making me question my choice in  ordering the book --- which made me re-post another comment, clarifying my position that I did not  regret ordering the book and rather, just hoped that people would check  it out and enjoy it.     I was a little concerned that my own comment  had been misinterpreted --- so imagine how Erika has felt about her  entire post.
What  I wanted to write about was how in this instance, it seemed like people  went quickly from discussion to just attacking each other.  One person  would accuse another of attacking, and then that person would react by  stating that they were not attacking, but merely disagreeing.  Does that  really help??  Is this just a matter of semantics?  Personally, I think  it’s all in the tone.  When we speak to each other face to face (or  even on the phone), we react to tone, and body language.  Communicating  via written word only takes that out of the equation, making us rely on  language alone --- and somehow, things can just get misunderstood.   You’d think it would be easier, almost --- but words can convey  feelings, whether it’s being angry, or being hurt (or anything else).    In this particular situation, on this blog, the comments became  somewhat ugly, and it seemed like the discussion veered completely off  the topic of the book, and became more of an opportunity for people to  needle each other.   Which was disappointing.
I suppose what I’m getting at here, after all of this, is to say this: It’s okay to agree to disagree.   We all have opinions, and I admit I am completely passionate about some of my opinions.  However, this doesn’t  mean that I don’t feel that it’s okay for other people to have their  own opinions, which may not be along the lines of my own opinion.   I’m  no stranger to an argument (and enjoy an occasional friendly  sparring)--- but what I try to remind myself (and sometimes, it can be difficult if I’m really at odds with what someone’s saying),  is that it’s okay for us to disagree.   I can disagree with how my  friend feels about a book, or a movie, or even an elected official, but  it doesn’t mean that I don’t like that friend anymore.   I can be a big  enough person to say, “You know what, it seems like we just don’t see  eye to eye on this.  Let’s agree to disagree, okay?” -- and then I try  to change the subject.   And I know what you’re thinking: this doesn’t  always work.  No, it doesn’t.  There are some people that I disagree  with on too many things, and I find I just avoid their company.   However, I try to make the effort.    I was reminded of this when I  read the comments, and they just kept coming.  It seemed like people  couldn’t agree to disagree and just leave it at that.  Erika did her  best to respond to comments, clarifying what she had written, even to  the point of going back into her original post and editing it to make  her feelings very clear.   Did it help?  Not really -- because it seemed  like people commenting were preferring to continue to spar with each  other.   Finally, she turned off the comments completely.  Snuffed it.
Her post remains, along with the comments, if you’d like to read them.   What I’d like anyone reading, is think about this:  It’s  okay to disagree with someone.  It’s okay to say that you disagree.   But it’s not really cool to disagree with someone’s opinion, and then  get in their face about the fact that they have that opinion.   I mean  --- I post reviews on this blog.  Sometimes, I’m not wild about a book.   However, I know that for each book that doesn’t resonate with me, that  there are other readers who feel that the book is amazing.   And that’s  okay.  I’ll go so far as to say that it’s more than okay -- it’s a good  thing.  It’s what keeps books around, and what keeps people reading.    And I don’t mind if someone says in a comment that they love a book  that I didn’t really like.  Hey, that’s cool --- maybe that person found  something in the book I just didn’t find the first time around, and it  might make me take a second look.   What wouldn’t be cool is if that person commented that they loved the book, and I’m an idiot (or whatever -- pick your own term here)  because I didn’t like it.  Just because I don’t like zucchini doesn’t  mean that I berate other people who like to eat it.   Or try to  eradicate it from everyone’s gardens.  I just don’t eat it.
Just putting these thoughts out there.   Maybe it's because it's almost Thanksgiving, and I'm just happy to be here -- and would love it if we could all just get along.
Murderbot
3 weeks ago
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Posts
Posts
 
 
8 comments:
Great post - and I'm going to visit the referenced blog as well. I worry about this all the time - how will authors/agents/publishers who send me material, specifically, react to my reviews - which is why I NEVER accept gifts (other than the book) and why I put in my guidelines for reviewing that, if they ask me to review a book, they must accept my honest review. I, too, use a personalized review system, which I created, that allows me to be as fair as possible - even pointing out the positives in books I didn't enjoy. Still, I worry about things getting out of control - so I moderate all comments on all my posts; if I find any inflammatory, I will not approve the comment (sometimes I will even e-mail/tweet the commenter directly to explain why I would not approve it and to welcome him/her to dialogue with me, but not engage in heated arguments on my blog. It's tedious, especially when I sometimes get upwards of 50-70+ comments on one post. Still, it helps. I hate to censor comments, as I have a huge issue with censorship in general, but some people honestly just don't "get" my original intent and, even if they do, still respond/react personally affronted by my opinion of a book, which is never good when we disagree. Open dialogue, sure. Factual debate, okay. But "I hate you because you totally bashed this book that I love and I am going to hunt you down and MAKE YOU LIKE IT" - not so good, and not worth the trouble.
Book Blogs have an obligation to remain honest - there is a 50/50 respect/fear sentiment out there from publishers and agents about Book Blogs. Half the time, publishers/agents love us because we are great at networking, marketing, and spreading the word on behalf of great books; but, half the time they live in fear of us because we do tend to be honest and to share what we truly feel, and not what the big publishers or book sellers want us to share. When they go all-out on marketing the next "big hit" for the literary world, but bloggers respond negatively to advance copies - it is a scary thing because it has an impact.
I guess this is a long-winded reply. What I really just meant to say was - continue to be honest. Your blog, your opinions. As long as you are not getting paid to write positive reviews, then share your thoughts, welcome discussion, but shut down the inflammatory comments and ignorant, emotion-driven arguments. They're worthless.
I'll keep it short .. Here, here! I agree that nobody should be personally attacked for their opinions on any subject. Very interesting post ... But that's just my opinion ...
WOW! That's just shocking. Well, not really I guess. I think that we should be allowed to like or to not like a book - or a post. I even have no problem with people disagreeing - I just don't want them to visit my 'house' to tell me that I'm wrong. You do not need to listen or read my viewpoints if you don't want to but there is not a good reason that anyone should have reamed her out because she expresses her viewpoints in her own 'home'... we are still in the US, right?
I think that, a lot of the time, people see what they want to see. They've got their blinders on, so they're not really reading and understanding the reviewer's point. In many cases, they're looking for something that they can pick at and start a fight with. And then it snowballs.
I had a drive-by snark the other day. Someone posted that they didn't think I liked any books, because I'd given a book a bad review. Never mind that in that review I'd posted a link to a book that I'd recommend instead. Never mind that there are a number of 4- and 5-star reviews on my site. (What bothered me most was that the snarker chose to remain anonymous. If you're going to criticize my blog, at least have the decency to own up to it!)
The Internet is full of people looking for a fight. When everybody starts to throw themselves into the ring for a rumble, then it's probably time to turn off the comments. Some people just aren't responsible or mature enough to be out in cyberspace without a babysitter, unfortunately.
Well put. These things happen. It's often best to rise above the fray and let others fight it out among themselves.
Yikes, the internet sure has the ability to bring out the worst in us, doesn't it? especially with the ability to post anonymously.
this is one of those times that I'm kinda glad hardly anyone reads my blog.
Hi Jo!
Thanks for commenting at my book blog. :)
I love your header & your theme, and frankly, your writing. You're obviously intelligent, and I envy you of your career path.
Regarding this post - some people's children... (heh) It's perfectly awesome to disagree. And if I don't like something, I try to tactfully and kindly state that I didn't like it. See, this is the part where those of us who _write_ put ourselves out there for the world to critique or criticize, must grow a thick enough skin to accept and appreciate the criticism.
I'm envious of the whole debate debacle, too. It would be awesome if someone read my stuff and argued with me on either of my blogs. *wink*
Also, it would be super cool if I had the opportunity, when leaving this comment, to post a link back to my book review blog... which I can't with the options you've given your commenters.
That aside, I love your blog, and I'm absolutely subscribing.
*nice to meet you!*
Thank you, everyone, for your comments!! :)
And Miss Ash -- I'll work on the comment format. :)
Post a Comment
Thank you for taking the time to comment!
Please note that I am officially designating this blog an award-free zone. Thank you!!