Wed Reading Meme...

[shadowkat]

I rather adore Illona Andrews - who writes the Kate Daniels series. Apparently the 6th book in the series, Magic Rises, was rather controversial.

(What is it about book serials and tv serials and the number 6? Actually, I think I know - this is when writers tend to experiment and go outside the proverbial box. They like to shake things up a bit. Evolve the characters, maybe even change a few things. And a lot of viewers and readers want comfort food - they want their tv show or books to give them what they expect...a comfortable time.

If you will excuse the Buffy fandom reference...I remember back in 2002 getting into a fight dialogue with a poster who went by the name "redactor", which considering the name - I'm not sure why I was surprised it went down the way it did.
Anyhow..the gist was this:

Me: Why do you watch Buffy?
Redactor: Thoughtless, comfortable and fun entertainment. No angst please.

I considered telling him he was watching the wrong show - and he should check out Charmed. But I restrained myself, knowing he wouldn't take that well.

Anyhow, I've not read Magic Rises yet, the 6th book. But I adore the writer's Q&A on their website:

With the comments from the blog, my email box had over 600 emails. I am not going to answer all of them. I just can’t. We’re on a deadline, and this would take days.

So I do apologize, but this has gone beyond my capacity. I hope you understand. It’s not that we don’t care or don’t appreciate you, it’s that the scope of feedback exceeds our ability to efficiently go through it. We are humbled and we are deeply grateful to you for taking the time to read our stuff.

1. I love the book

Thank you so much. We are delighted that the book worked for you.

2. I hate the book.

We are sorry the book didn’t work for you. Not every book will appeal to every person. Thank you so much for giving us a try.

3. I disagreed with something you said or wrote and I will argue with you in the comments to this an other posts. You owe me, you suck, and I will tell you all about it because you need to know etc, etc.

I wish you wouldn’t. We can’t write a book tailored to your expectations. There are thousands of you, and a book by committee wouldn’t be a very good book. We can only write the best book we can according to our expectations.

If you are upset about the book, the internet has many forums available to you. If you just can’t help yourself, go ahead, but we will not respond to your comment. If it contains personal attacks or profanity, it will be deleted.

[Honestly, Neil Gaiman's response sticks with me on this one - "the writer is not your bitch!" They are nicer.]

Maybe I'm weird, but I've never felt the need to tell a writer that I hate their work. Love yes, hate no. Oh sure I'll rant about it in my own blog or in a review on Good Reads or Facebook. But I'm not going to tell them. And I don't feel a desire to argue with them about what they wrote or tell them they are wrong. They have the right to tell the story however they so desire. It's their story. And they've put the time and effort into putting it out there - a scary thing to do.
Attacking them personally - seems...a bit cruel.


1. What I just finished reading?

Magic Bleeds. Which was surprisingly good. The writers get better as they go. And it had the most interesting villain to date. Kate Daniels arc is about a loner who has been taught not to care about anyone, who chooses to care and ends up deeply attached to others. It's about how we make our own families and communities and how we need one another to survive. Even if that can be deeply painful at times, and very risky.

I adore the writing style. Which is important. It's snarky, and doesn't take itself too seriously. Also, I don't have to think that hard. Does have a few inconsistencies. The time line in this series is confusing. In one section, we're told three weeks have gone by, in another it's three days. They have their readers beta, but I think they need to find a more anal retentive beta. I'd volunteer, but I hate that sort of thing. That's why I find it difficult asking for beta, I hate doing it.

2. What I'm reading now?

Magic Slays - also quite good so far. They are developing the Andrea Nash and Kate Daniels friendship. This is amongst the few books that I've read in this genre that has a strong focus on platonic friendships. Also it passes the Beschdel test with flying colors. They rarely talk about men.

Makes me laugh as well. Lots of witty banter - which appears to be the writers voice.

3. What I'm reading next?

Gunmetal Magic - the Andrea Nash novel and Magic Gifts (companion novella) that comes before Magic Rises. I read that these two stories enhance Magic Rises. Also have decided to grab "An Ill-Advised Rescue" when I get the chance. And have downloaded Curran's POV stories, written by Gordon Andrews.

In July, Magic Breaks comes out - apparently. Will most like take a break and read
Skin Game by Jim Butcher in between. The writing style of the Kate Daniels books is very similar to Jim Butcher's writing style - snarky and doesn't take itself too seriously.

Comments

[cactuswatcher.livejournal.com]

We certainly did get some strange opinions back in the day. Maybe the poster was looking for "Tool Time" and got the wrong time and network. By 2002 the angst was pretty deep at BTVS. I can imagine whoever wasn't very happy with BTVS.

I can't imagine wading through e-mails as an author. You see a lot of folks on Youtube who turn off comments either temporarily or permanently, because so much of it is just trolls spouting off. You can't politely explain things to people who aren't interested in listening. You can't explain that while many readers wanted A and B to get together the story was about A and C getting together, cause those folks aren't going to listen.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Hee. Yeah - someone hunting a fluffy quippy teen show - was going to be sorely disappointed in the later seasons of Buffy. And it did get pretty dark and angsty in 2002. I find the second half of S6 very hard to re-watch.

The internet has really changed things. It makes it easier to rant or spout off. OR be trollish. Because you don't see the pain on the other side.

And you're right - you can't have a rational conversation with these people. When someone states an "absolute" opinion - it's a conversation stopper.

I can only imagine what it must be like to receive a 100 emails stating: "Your book sucked. You jumped the shark! blah..blah..blah..." And that's after getting past the normal rejection letter process.

[kathyh]

They have the right to tell the story however they so desire. It's their story. And they've put the time and effort into putting it out there - a scary thing to do.
Attacking them personally - seems...a bit cruel.

I agree totally. I've never understood why people do this. I suppose it's because people have committed to the story and want it to go the way they like, but it's not the reader's story, it's the authors. What I really never understand is the amount of rage that some people seem to feel over things like this.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

What I really never understand is the amount of rage that some people seem to feel over things like this.

I think the rage is often misdirected. The person is actually really angry about something else - but unable to direct that rage at the thing they are angry at - so they'll read something, and it just incites that knee jerk reaction.

Or it's a physical reaction - biochemical imbalance - which results in obsessing and over-reacting to cultural media.

OR something just pushes their buttons. They fell in love with and got obsessed with a story or series and devoted a lot of energy to it - going this way - and the writer chose to go in the opposite direction or did something that went against the thread of story they were invested in.
I remember in Buffy fandom - how furious fans were when the tv writers killed off Tara in order to turn Willow evil or when they had Spike attempt to rape Buffy. It felt, from the fans point of view, as if the writers deliberately set out to hurt them or punish them. They'd invested so much of themselves in the story and in following the writers - that they felt as if the writers had betrayed their trust.

Actually - I think in some cases that may well be the source of some of the rage in fandom circles. That breakage of trust between writer and reader. The reader trusts that the writer will tell them an engaging tale. They've paid for it. They spent time watching/reading it. It's sort of like paying someone to do a task, and they don't deliver or don't provide what you paid for. I think that may well be it.

Which I can sort of understand...but with writing and art, you have to know going in that what the writer is delivering is their story, not yours. And there's a 50/50 chance that you'll hate it. You are taking a risk as is the writer. And actually the writer is taking the bigger risk - they have more time, more money, and more energy invested.

[frenchani.livejournal.com]

Maybe I'm weird, but I've never felt the need to tell a writer that I hate their work. Love yes, hate no. Oh sure I'll rant about it in my own blog or in a review on Good Reads or Facebook. But I'm not going to tell them. And I don't feel a desire to argue with them about what they wrote or tell them they are wrong. They have the right to tell the story however they so desire. It's their story. And they've put the time and effort into putting it out there - a scary thing to do.

Me neither. You are not weird, but quite sane.

I think that only weirdos used to do that (tell a writer they hated their work) back in the days, before the Internet made so easy to reach an author, and you had to write an actual letter and send it to a "real" person on Earth, provided that you managed to find their address. I can't help thinking that now that we all surf on this virtual world, people feel allowed to do everything. Morality and high technology don't necessarily go along.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I can't help thinking that now that we all surf on this virtual world, people feel allowed to do everything. Morality and high technology don't necessarily go along.

I keep thinking about a Louis CK youtube video that I saw recently - where the comedian states why he won't buy his kids cell phones. He said that the problem with text-messaging and face book - is that you can tell someone they are fat or insult them - without seeing the effect. Normally when you do it to someone's face - you see their pain. But when you text or post it? You don't.

It's so easy to use words to wound. The internet makes it even easier. And if you are having a bad day, or are upset about something in your personal life and have come online to relieve stress or connect - there's that extra level of vulnerability and emotion added.

Add to this the speed of response time...where you can post and send or text and send without reading or proofing what you wrote first...and well, often you may post something in the heat of the moment that you will regret later.

Plus, it's so easy to be misunderstood. Snark doesn't always come across well on the internet.

A lot of celebrities and politicians have discovered this the hard way on Twitter. Navigating social media can be dangerous.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

Maybe I'm weird, but I've never felt the need to tell a writer that I hate their work. Love yes, hate no. Oh sure I'll rant about it in my own blog or in a review on Good Reads or Facebook. But I'm not going to tell them.

I would tell Anne Rice that contrary to her own opinion, editors are a GOOD THING.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Depends on the editor. She already has one, who apparently isn't doing their job.