A Polite Answer to a 'Review'

Greetings to all my friends and readers out there, it has been quite some time since I’ve had the chance to site down for a quiet hour and compose for my blog.  What with three teenagers home all day on the Yuletide holidays and the frantic efforts to get my eldest into a university course after the regional bell curve and algebraic massaging of VTAC turned his straight A and A+’s into C’s and a pitiful scatter of B’s.  But I’ll deal with that discriminatory bias by Victorian Education anon.  The local bushfires and a few unfortunate tragedies too close to home of course didn’t help matters.  In the meantime I’d like to bring up a vexing subject for writers, both retained and Indie, that of Amazon reviews.  I know this particular theme can fill countless blog and forum pages and I don’t wish to revisit old arguments or well hashed debates, instead based on observation over the past couple of years I’ll divide them into three classifications.

1. Genuine comments from readers responding to their perceived view of a novel.
2. Sock puppets of aggrieved fellow authors or would be writers and hired hacks from various publicity or publishing houses.
3. Trolls out to gain vicarious satisfaction and jollies by putting others down.

There of course many other sub divisions and categories but I think these three will suffice.

Now for the writer the question is do you answer these reviews?  That is a ticklish question, on the one hand responding to a good or average review is a polite acknowledgement for effort.  While to answer the commonly baseless accusations can be seen to be pandering to the desires, plans or prejudices of sock puppets and trolls giving them a bigger target.  Though to let those go unanswered can have serious consequences on the sales and promotion of your novels.  It really is a quandary, to give the benefit of the doubt to a suspicious review or reveal them as malicious frauds?

Well here’s how I’m going to deal with one review that’s left me perplexed and dismayed for the past few months.  By the way my deepest thanks to my dear friends at EHFA for their helpful advice and support regarding this matter.

Darkness Divined

MarieG 2.0 out of 5 stars Confusing! 7 Oct 2012

As a great fan of historical novels I didn't expect to find myself so befuddled by the content of this story. It seemed that as a reader I was thrown into the middle of a story that I had missed half of. Without warning I was presented with a vampire strand of the story and I just got confused about where the story was. I couldn't finish it which is something that I rarely say once I start a book. Additionally the Kindle edition had many grammatical and spelling errors that were distracting in the extreme. I am surprised that there are not more reviews of this book. Great idea and style but For me lost in translation (sorry).

To MarieG

Thank you for review I have thought long and hard about your comments and have delayed replying as I mulled them over trying to work out the areas of your difficulties.  So I will endeavour to give you satisfaction one item at a time. 

1. A great fan of Historical Fiction befuddled by the content of the story.

1. #28 in Books > Fantasy > Historical
2. #43 in Kindle Store > Books > Fiction > Fantasy > Historical

The story is listed in the historical fantasy genre as is proved by the above ranking prominently displayed on the book page.  It is not, nor does it imply either by promo, prologue or genre placement to be historical fiction.  While set in the nominal world of a young Henry VIII the phrase - the dark magicks of reanimation should have given a hefty hint that this novel strayed into the supernatural.

2. An unexpected vampire strand of the story

Firstly I refer you to the above ranking of the story in the Amazon genre categories it is a Historical Fantasy, so by classification it must have fantastic, supernatural or magical elements as part of the story like, witches, elves, demons and so on.  Secondly the book promo refers directly to these two phrases- Now Francis knows very well who killed Gwen, the problem is ensuring she stays safely dead while he tracks down the source of the dark magicks of reanimation.  Now that should give the clue that we are dealing with a heavy fantasy component, as well as magick and the walking dead.

Or then, maybe Mistress Annise? That’s if you can trust a drinker of blood.  As for the, to you unexpected inclusion of a vampyre, if it is in the promo and it is historical fantasy as we’ve already proved you’d have to be pretty disappointed if a drinker of blood wasn’t a vampyre.

Thirdly the first two and a half chapters are available to read in Amazon’s Look Inside option or as a sample download.  Now I’m really not giving anything away in stating quite bluntly that the first few pages give more than a hint that this tale is dealing with the reanimated dead, as Francis grapples with the suddenly moving slain woman.  That’s not something you’d normally expect in your average Tudor historical fiction, but does fit with fantasy.

3. Grammatical and spelling errors 

Ahh yes the old bugbear, this is always difficult to answer since when it comes up no evidence is provided, it’s a bit like the old Tudor cry of treason or witchcraft just enough to set the mobs a howling for blood but no proof.  Considering that I can easily cite over a dozen prominent works of fiction and non fiction with the most abysmal spelling and grammar is not an excuse, but it is reality.  I suggest that if you would care to equally direct your outraged ire at the larger publishing houses rather than just poorly resourced Indies then I will readily accept your admonishment.  However I believe it is stated quite conclusively at the start of the book that I use Tudor spellings for places and occasionally titles and terms as well as a glossary.  As for grammar both my editor and I use the Australian style manual and a very large pile of Tudor reference books (see this link for a partial list).  Although, as I’ve seen what is considered correct grammatical practice can vary wildly between genres, professions and regions, let alone those between continents supposedly using the same language.  All I can say is that my personal style is the product of my heritage, education, reading and environment.  I can however assure you that if you direct me to any particular problems they will be remedied. 

4. More reviews…Great idea and style

Thank you for that part of your review, though your phrasing leaves a hanging question, was that more good reviews or bad reviews?  Unfortunately the praise comes well after your emphatic expressions of confusion and dislike so I’m not sure you actually meant it, but I will be a gentleman allow you the benefit of the doubt.  So my thanks, for leaving your opinion.

Regards Greg

Sir Thomas More, an example for Indie Writers?

Greetings fellow Tudor aficionados and well regarded readers, please accept my apologies for the long absence, lots of writing and editing took up too large a proportion of my time.  I thought today I’d be terribly self indulgent and link my current plight with that of perhaps the most famous Tudor writer, Sir Thomas More.  This eminent scholar, politician and the author of Utopia and A Dialogue concerning Heresies to name but two of his works, was a witness and participant of the most dramatic years of the reign of Henry VIII.  His writings have helped form modern perceptions in such diverse areas as religious thought, political morality and even Shakespeare’s plays (particularly Richard III).  I have started to discuss my perceptions of Thomas More in an earlier blog article The Reality of the Written Word and Thomas More so I won’t go over that ground again.  

Instead I think we should discuss a few examples of Thomas More and his efforts to spread the word as it were for his writings.

Now for the few of you who may not know it, apart from talent, Thomas More the writer was gifted with advantages that the rest of us modern day scribblers really couldn’t imagine.   Except for that coterie of Romantic and Gothic era writers who tended to indulge in a touch too much laudanum…among other diverse pursuits.  More was an important figure at the Royal Court even before he became Lord Chancellor so a ‘suggestion’ to a prospective printer came with the sort of implied hints that only a fool or one keen on prison food would ignore.  Secondly his brother in law John Rastell was a printer at the ‘sygn of the mearemayd next to pollys gate’ so from around 1520- 1535 this provided More with a printer on tap.  Then there was a final advantage that any modern media baron would easily understand…money.  While Thomas More’s personal wealth couldn’t compete with that of his former lord Cardinal Wolsey, it was never the less pretty damned good for the Tudor period.  There was also a suggestion in some contemporary accounts that More had been the recipient of thousands of pounds from the English Church to act as a lobbyist and advisor.  Thus Thomas More had that most amazing of opportunities for any writer, he could easily fund the printing and distribution of as many of his books as he wanted.  He had the contacts, the influence, the network, the prestige and the envious ability even now to write at a prodigious speed. So with all these advantages I have to ask one question.

 

Why did Thomas More forge his own book reviews? 

The advent of movable type via Gutenberg had a dramatic impact, it was the Information Revolution of the Renaissance and very much like the Internet was for us, speeding up discussion on just about very aspect of society.  Especially religion, quite a few historians have put forward that Martin Luther’s assault upon the Catholic Church may not have had as much of an impact if his declaration hadn’t instantly been rushed into print.  It is these very heretical complaints of Luther’s that had More extremely steamed up.  In 1520-21 he’d recently finished helping his Sovereign  Henry VIII compose his Assertio or the Assertion of the Seven Sacraments for which the Pope granted him the title of Defender of the Faith.  Ironically a title still held by the British monarchs.  Well just like a modern chat room flame war this prompted responses backwards and forwards until 1522-23.   More then decided on a counter blast to knock the ‘shitty befouled heretic’ for a six by publishing his Responsio ad Lutherum or the Response against Luther.  It was indeed, ‘ahem’ an astounding piece of work.  At a time which held a certain minimal level of literary decorum this little tome hit new lows giving us some lovely phrases of abuse, invective and insult. 
 For instance a quoted extract in Marius’ biography on More.

“will we not have the posterior right to proclaim the beshitted tongue of this practitioner of posterioristics most fit to lick with his anterior the very posterior of a pissing she mule.”  And that’s the polite part, for the rest he pulls out all the usual Renaissance writing ploys like exaggeration, classical allusions, fantastic legends, outright lies and occasionally when nothing else can be found …the truth.

So after going on in this vain for thousands of words More apparently decided to publish this under the name William Rosse.  Okay that’s fair enough there are hundreds of instances of pen names through out history, however More appears to have been unsatisfied with this simple nom de plume.  He decided to take this a few steps further and also added a number of fictitious reviews from apparently eminent scholars such as Hermann of Prague, John Carcelius and Ferdinand Baravellus.  Now this does sound familiar a very contemporary practice inventing reviews to boosts sales.  More though didn’t stop there, each of his imaginary reviewers then egged each other on plus backing up William Rosse in his ‘need’ to defend his slandered monarch.  Apparently More himself urged his friends to defend the right worthy Master Rosse even asking Erasmus to lend his pen to the cause.  The humanist scholar sensibly sidestepped simply remarking that Luther could learn the use of invective from Master Rosse.

As for impact it certainly was a memorable work in the literary and religious circles of Europe, though it certainly didn’t have the effect More intended.  Those heretical mischief makers increased in number and popularity thus Sir Thomas was soon forced to resort to more physical methods of dissuasion like in imprisonment and torture.  But the question remains, why did the most respected and influential humanist writer in England ghost his book and go to such lengths to fake his reviews?  Was it political, perhaps a touch of shame or did he really believe any tactic was worth the result?  Since the Catholic Church has put its imprimatur on his writings and life as well as making him the patron saint of politicians, I have to ask is this really a worthy example for writers to follow?  Do we not see too much plagiarism and faked reviews?   Where should Indie writers who desperately need an edge in promotion look to for inspiration?

I would suggest others would be more worthy, especially our readers.

Now Indie writers have many advantages, such as enthusiasm, they are able to pursue their projects with passion and verve often devoting long hours to research and finely crafting their pieces.  They also thrive on the most minuscule rewards, compliments and praise.  Always striving to directly connect with their audience and give the reader the personal link that is so frequently impossible in the commercial world.

However all that being said, they/we/I also continually labour under a number of ominously heavy burdens.  Being an Indie means you lack fully developed commercial networks, influence and resources unlike Sir Thomas More.  Covers the eye candy and blazon of your work are essentially whatever you can afford, which in my very fortunate case is my talented son Alexander.  For editing the bane and bugbear of many I have my extremely experienced partner Jocelyn, who squeezes her reviewing in between all the other tasks expected of a parent.  As for publicity, well this is it, blogs, Face book, forums and mostly the kindness of strangers.  Thus it is too these kindly passers-by that I frame this request.  The vast majority of Indies are not Thomas Mores, we cannot plug in unbelievable sums into publicity nor do we fabricate wonderfully glowing reviews (though it may get tempting).  Instead we ask our readers to pause, even for a minute or two and let someone else know what interested you about this indie book, did it amuse, enthral, satisfy or make you curious.  If it did even in the slightest, how about leaving your thoughts as a review so some other passer by can experience the same pleasure of discovery.  Go on take a minute, you can spare it and you’ll feel so much better afterwards.
Coming soon to Amazon Kindle The Cardinals Angels

Regards Greg