(And the free sample story “Last Full Measure” available for download is mine. If you know someone who wouldlike a space combat short story.)

I like hit-’em-fast-and-leave-them-thinking writing, and for the first year or so I was writing for this market my stories averaged just under 6,000 words — with a couple under 3k. 10k was long for me. The readers on the boards consistently commented that they wanted longer stories. “We just get to know these characters and they’re gone.” was a recurring theme. So in response to a consistent pattern in reviews of my work, I started writing longer (though I still throw in a few short stories). My last five sales to BattleCorps have been 24k. 3k, 39k, 36k and 10k respectively.

However, basically I have to side with Sylvia and Sam on this one, mainly because, in my experience, most criticism stems from personal taste — choices in characterization, voice, style, etc. that didn’t work for the reviewer. That doesn’t mean the comments aren’t valid — as Sam said, reviews are for readers, enabling them to make better choices based on their own criteria for what constitutes a “good” book.

If, for instance, the reviewer takes a book to task for certain elements, then those readers with similar hot buttons would do well to steer clear of that book. Then again, readers who don’t have a problem with, say, headhopping POV, won’t pass on a book simply because of that aspect…nor should the author, who may be selling quite well despite that particular technical quirk, be expected to “improve” her skills in accordance with that, or even a handful of other reviewers’, tastes.

It just doesn’t work that way.

In the ten or so years since I’ve been published, I’ve rarely, rarely seen a real “consensus” about any book, online or anywhere else. Yes, if someone says, “Oh, I just hated the TSTL character in Wanda Writer’s latest book,” it’s a sure bet a dozen other people will jump on the bandwagon and say, “Me, too!” More often than not, some brave soul will jump into the fray and say, “Wait a minute — I thought she was gutsy and wonderful, and the book’s gone on my keeper shelf!”, and then people will “Me, too!” that, and a lively discussion ensues.

And sometimes, for whatever reason, perhaps for fear of looking uncool on that particular blog or site or whatever, nobody takes the other side. But just because no one seems to be taking the other side, that doesn’t mean there isn’t one.

And even a dozen “boos” doesn’t qualify as a mandate.

Editors buy books because they feel enough readers will love them as much as they do to justify the expense and energy of publication. But nobody’s naive enough to assume *everyone* will love them, or that some people won’t have issues with various aspects of the story or the writing. But the reverse is also true — that no book will be universally hated, either. There really does seem to be a readership for everything, and simply because a particular book doesn’t fire someone’s jets doesn’t mean readers should be deprived of that book — yes, exactly the way it’s written.

I think it’s fairly safe to say that few authors turn in a book that’s not the best they can make it, at that point in their creative journey. It’s also a good bet that most of us continually work to improve our craft, within the parameters of our unique voices and the characters whose stories we have to tell. But to expect authors to mold that craft to reviewers’ personal tastes is absurd, especially when — in the vast majority of cases — there is no such thing as a “consensus.”

My husband and I watched the Coppola MARIE ANTOINETTE over the weekend. Having heard the reviews were mixed, we went into it with pretty low expectations. I liked it more than I thought I would, he didn’t. But we both understood what Coppola was trying to do with her material.

For giggles, I looked up the major reviews for the movies, which ranged from A to D. Some reviewers loved it, some clearly thought it was a pretentious piece of crap, others were ambivalent. Whether or not Coppola’s vision “worked” clearly depended on the individual reviewer’s POV and personal taste.

So I ask you — should Coppola have considered the dissing, by a handful of reviewers, for her avant garde approach a “consensus” that she needs to rethink her movie making philosophy? And if she were to do that (not bloody likely, I’m thinking) wouldn’t she then be betraying those who love her work, just the way it is?

And would any of those reviewers expect her to alter her vision to please them?

I doubt it.

We (writers, movie makers, etc.) can only do what we can do. Once a piece is published (which means it’s already gone through God knows how many rounds of critiques, revisions and editing), it’s out of our hands. Readers/reviewers are free to love it, hate it, or have no reaction at all. If a criticism resonates with us, and we can effectively incorporate it into our future work, that’s one thing. If sales suddenly drop, as Sam said, then obviously something needs tweaking. In most cases, however, it’s NOT the writing at fault, or the characters, or the story. It’s the five million things totally outside the author’s control. Brilliant books languish on the shelves (or never find them at all); mediocre books can sell through the roof.

And no publisher or author is going to tinker with something that’s actually working. NO ONE.

Because in the end, it’s not about our ability to TAKE criticism (or at least, to take it gracefully), it’s about the impossibility of pleasing everyone. So. Writers tell their stories, and reviewers give their opinions, and readers make their choices.

And, well, that’s it, really.

The way I see it? If a reviewer can’t quibble with the author’s grasp of the basic writing tools(characterization, structure, Voice, scene and sequel, etc) than that piece of art just didn’t speak to them. Otherwise, IMO, the review has merit even if the delivery of it isn’t appreciated.

Writers have no obligation or need to take a review as advice, and I would even caution against it. Reviews are a recommendation from one reader to another, and that’s it.

If there is a large enough demographic that doesn’t like the book or who doesn’t want to buy it for some reason, if our sales drop, that will show in numbers and editors and marketing will help an author find the problem — could have been many things, packaging, time of year, other books on the shelf, etc. If it was a writing issue, they will target that too, and more reliably than the random blog or review site.

And as for writers just shutting up — sorry, but I think that’s a HUGE double standard. So, reviewers should get to be as snarky and verbal as they like, but writers should sit and take it quietly? Reviewers can get snarky and personal, but a writer has to be quiet? Why? Why can’t a writer express their feelings about a review? Why isn’t that a legitimate response? Why shouldn’t we question a reviewer’s opinion? Isn’t that the same freedom of expression that allows a snarky review in the first place?

Let the snarky reviews exist, and let writers say what they want. If one person gets to share their opinion, why not everyone? Let it just be one big free for all…

Sam

we just disagree on the point that using reviews as teaching tools is a way to go about it.

I look at it like this. Say you’re looking for a new agent and you’ve written a book that you think is great and your beta readers agree. You’ve revised and polished it, so you’re ready to query agents. Let’s say an agent tells you, “I don’t like this particular book but I enjoy your writing. Please send me something else, though, when you finish it.”

So you do that. Six more times! Over the course of your back and forth agent-search. (Ask Lauren Baratz-Logsted, it does happen. Hee!) Well, at that point, it’s safe to decide this agent is probably never going to like your books, even though they enjoy your writing (which oddly enough is also possible).

I think review sites can be like this. If they consistently hate everything you write, then possibly they’re just never going to get you, so you can dismiss their feedback as not being relevant. But before that point, an author might miss something that can help her write better books. I don’t advocate changing styles, but if a review site said they would like to see more (X) in my writing, I’d consider it before automatically saying, “They don’t know what they’re talking about.” That’s just how I see it anyway.

That’s where we differ, Sylvia. I’m always trying to write better books. I hope every novel I write is better than the last.

We don’t differ in that opinion. Less than 48 hours ago on this very blog I wrote, “Really, if we stop trying to get better, I think we need to quit.”

While I agree to a point, there’s no reason to rewrite a book, based on one person’s opinion, I think it helps going forward when you take into account what worked, overwhelmingly, for your audience and what didn’t.

Exactly! And online review sites are not the general consensus of whether your book worked for your audience or not. I appreciate every review, good or bad. I figure the book affected the reviewer enough to spend time out of their life to write about it. But my audience isn’t review sites, it’s everyone (which does include reviewers, but they are the minority when looked at in relation to the reading population as a whole.) The reading population’s consensus of worked or not can’t be found in an online review or even a handful of online reviews.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve LOVED a book, then read a bad review(s) for it that would have changed the very things I loved.

I think we both agree that striving to improve as a writer is important, we just disagree on the point that using reviews as teaching tools is a way to go about it.