Sera — so true about the spectator sport. Humans are way better than television. While I understand defending your art, sometimes it’s better to bite your tongue. Or lock yourself in a room for a few weeks.

And just this week, actor Rob Schneider took out a full page ad in Variety to trash a Los Angeles Times reporter who said the reason why indie films were getting Oscar nominations was because Hollywood was making films like a sequel to “Deuce Bigelow: Male Gigelow”. You’ve gotta find text of Schneider’s train-wreck of a rant.

Petulancy from authors/artists is a wonderful spectator sport. I’m not sure why they can’t understand that it’s impossible to come off looking good ranting about bad reviews. Maybe creativity and hyper-sensitivity are closely-tied traits.

I was scrolling through an author’s chatgroup the other day, and one of the members, who is also a reviewer, popped on and said her review site wanted the reviewers to ask authors what they were looking for in a review.

Authors. Not readers. Authors.

And do you know, someone asked the reviewer this exact same question. Aren’t reviews meant for the readers? Why ask what the authors are looking for?

Sadly, I don’t think it had even occurred to the reviewer to question her review site about this. She didn’t have an answer and it seemed that she found nothing hinky about this.

I know alot of reviewers who hang out online and they swear they write objective, honest reviews. I want to know who they write for because it’s really hard to find a review based on craft and not personal feelings in today’s world of internet friendships and connections.

There was one woman though, who needs to review for someone who actually wants to print an honest review. She’s a former reviewer who said she had to quit because the review site wanted her to write positive things about a book she thought was completely terrible.

“I didn’t think they meant that I thought the heroine had fabulous hair.”

The question of qualifications to review is a good one — I came into it with a background in critical writing about literature, but there isn’t a test you can give someone. In the end, it’s probably a lot like getting to Carnegie Hall

I will admit to buying books based on bad reviews — sometimes I just have to see for myself.

Right, Jennifer! That’s one thing I don’t understand about the majority of romance review sites. Many said that they shy from writing “negative” reviews, including acknowledging weak parts of a story in a positive review, because they don’t want to hurt authors’ feelings.

Fair enough, but it doesn’t seem occur to them that by doing that, they are hurting readers’ purses/pocket wallets. Because of that, it’s very likely that readers won’t trust their reviews again. Sorry, it just baffles me that there are some romance reviewers who actually worry about authors’ feelings when penning reviews. What’s the point of reviewing if they allow that to interfer with their – excuse me as I can’t think of a nicer word – ability to review books?

I’m not saying that they should – as one organisation of romance reviewers puts it – “slash and dice” romances. I’m saying that constructive criticism and honesty would be nice. I know many authors think that bad reviews would affect their sales, but based on conversations with fellow romance readers, this is not true.

Many readers actually appreciate those reviews that highlight weak parts because at least they buy books with their eyes wide open. I do this as well. I mean, a few times I have read some ‘negative’ reviews and went ahead in buying books, anyway.

OK, I will shut up now.