Guest Post: Snark Attack

Snark Attack by Jill Sorenson

Like most Romanceland regulars, I listen to gossip, follow kerfuffles, and read snarky reviews. I’ve never been called a “mean girl” to my face, but as an author who reviews, I might be considered one. Online reviewing is fraught with controversy. I like that about it! Well, sometimes.

Jessica of Read React Review wrote an excellent article about Mean Girls. Has of Book Pushers also spoke out against the “Be Nice” brigade, in response to the backlash over author Jennifer Armintrout’s snarky criticisms of 50 Shades of Grey.

I didn’t read Armintrout’s post, so I’m not going to comment on the specifics of it. I’m more interested in the larger issues. Should authors write snarky reviews? Are some reviewing styles off-limits?

Although I love a sharp wit, there is a certain type of review that I try to avoid. It’s the tightly focused, chapter-by-chapter or line-by-line analysis, with extended snark. Here is a recent example from a guest reviewer at Dear Author.

This kind of review falls into tl;dr* territory for me. I’m just not interested in so much detail. There is also an agenda if the reviewer chooses a book for the purpose of ridiculing it. Bad dialogue and ridiculous plot points are highlighted to entertain the audience. Is it fair? Sure. No one can make fun of flaws that aren’t there! But it doesn’t mimic a normal, open-minded reading experience for me. I prefer for snark to come…organically, when a reviewer finds a story they dislike on accident.

I’m not trying to tell reviewers what to do. Many, many readers enjoy this reviewing style. As an author, I’d be flattered to have my book examined in such depth. I think I’d be a good sport about it. As a reader, it’s just not for me.

Would I recommend that authors write reviews like this? No. Again, this is just my opinion, not a call for niceness or an attempt to silence my peers. I love author reviews! Most authors keep it positive and that’s fine by me. Thoughtful criticism is great. Snark-as-entertainment is tougher to get behind. Coming from another author, it can sting more.

Here’s a personal example. I remember how excited I was to see the cover of my first book, Dangerous to Touch. My husband said that the heroine’s dress and jewel placement reminded him of, ah, female anatomy. Not the words he used. Anyway, we laughed together and I hoped no one else would notice. I loved the vibrant colors, and the fact that the hero actually looks Mexican-American. I posted it on an author loop with pride. Someone (I don’t remember who) said: Nice, but why is there snot hanging out of the hero’s nose?

My husband’s comment about ladyparts was hilarious! This fellow author’s joke? Not funny. Not at all.

*tl;dr = too long; didn’t read

And I’m curious. What do you think of all this? Have an opinion? Where is your “line”? And have you caught all the numerous (or even innumerable) kerfluffles since January? It’s been a crazy year for sure!

0 thoughts on “Guest Post: Snark Attack

  1. Avery Flynn

    I love a good, snarky review even the long ones. Sometimes a book just strikes that cord with readers. My cutoff is when the snark crosses into personal attack. Ugly for author and ugly for reviewer. So what’s that line? To paraphrase the SC, I know it when I see it.

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      I pretty much agree that any level of snark is fair game unless it’s a personal attack. Then again, I follow a reviewer who name-calls/curses authors on the basis of racism or sexism and I can’t decide if she crosses the line. I don’t know where the line is. If the author has made homophobic remarks or done something reprehensible, do they deserve a personal attack?

      Reply
      1. Avery Flynn

        Anyone who makes sexist or racist remarks deserves to be called out in my opinion, but was it the author making the remark in an interview or was the author writing a racist or sexist character in a novel. Imagine if To Kill a Mockingbird didn’t have any objectionable material from a character. Should Harper Lee be open to personal attacks for the racists she wrote about?

        Reply
  2. Limecello Post author

    Hi Jill,

    I’m not quite sure how I feel about the topic. Snarky reviews are of course entertaining. Generally. I think a number of them have turned into “look at how clever I am!” instead of addressing the actual “issue” though – be it a book, film, etc.

    And taking someone down for the purpose of *that* diminishes the whole thing to me. Snark for the sake of snark though, I enjoy. If that makes sense. (If you’re doing it in the whole fun for the sake of it.)

    Although I guess the person or item on the receiving end it’s never fun. Of course, the author is not the book – and I think that’s where the difficulty comes in. Criticizing a book isn’t criticizing an author. (At least it shouldn’t be – as Avery said, personal attacks are too much.)

    I think it also depends on who it’s coming from. If you’re good friends with the person and know they don’t mean to be malicious, then it’s almost anything goes. (Of course the person could one day go crazy and react in a way you’d never have imagined to a innocuous comment.)

    Or, if the reviewer is normally sarcastic and cutting – then it’s more expected. But if the person is generally Suzy Sunshine Pollyanna, and then she eviscerates a book… yeah – that’s harder. (And then you suspect there is something personal going on there.)

    I’m over thinking this so I’ll stop.

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      I overthink this topic all the time! Even now I feel like I’ve said too much and not enough. Insert foot in mouth.

      I agree with you about the fun vs. clever thing. I also think that most romance snark comes from a good place and shows a serious love of the genre.

      I have a longer response to this…must come back later to finish!!

      Reply
      1. jillsorenson

        I just wanted to add that it does matter (to me) where the snark is coming from. Yes, reviews are for readers, and the author’s feelings don’t matter. Unless the reviewer IS an author. Then maybe the relationship is different, and a respectful tone is warranted? I don’t know. Should author-reviewers, like authors, be held to a higher standard?

        I also don’t see reviewers criticizing each other in a snarky fashion, as in “This review sucks sparkly vampire balls!” I think there is a tendency for reviewers to be supportive of other reviewers, and making fun of other readers is definitely viewed in a negative light.

        Reply
      2. Limecello Post author

        Interesting points, Jill. I think reviewers might/do “band together” as it were when it becomes a clear “author vs reviewer” dynamic… but otherwise, it’s pretty cut throat/dog eat dog.
        Or maybe it’s just the interaction I see/observe, but the author network is much more protective and supportive than the reader/reviewer network.

        I agree it’s difficult – most authors just don’t write reviews. Some because they think it’s wrong, some because they don’t want to deal with people being drama llamas. Personally, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with authors reviewing books. As Mary says below, authors are readers (and people!) too.

        There are different standards though, but I don’t think anyone has bothered parsing them out. Likely an author who does write a snark filled review would be lambasted. (Or, not even likely – clearly, what with the Jennifer Armintrout and Jennifer L Armentrout thing. Of course there was a minor slip where on said “*I* have common sense” which then made me facepalm.)

        Reply
  3. willaful

    I think I get what you mean about snark coming organically. I’ve written some snarky reviews, because the books really just called out for them. But it’s only one small part of reviewing for me and it’s based on my honest reaction.

    Reply
  4. Brie

    I’m glad I’m not the only one who feels those DA reviews are way too long! In that particular case, I think the first one was hilarious, but the following, though funny, were unnecessary. It was more for show and comedy than to let readers know about how bad the book was. Fair enough, but not my thing.

    I like snarky reviews, but I don’t like them all the time. Using DA’s guest review as example once again, if that site was just reviews like that, I wouldn’t read it. The point of reading reviews is finding potential new books and authors, then why read a blog that’s all about bad books? But once in a while? I think they are great. It lets me know the reviewer is honest and not one of those who like everything they read, or just review everything they like. Reviews are more useful when you know the reviewer’s taste, and dislikes are a part of that. Also, snark can be really funny.

    I don’t mind authors reviewing books, they are readers as well, so why not? Someone who is familiar with writing should offer an interesting view on the books they read, they may caught details that otherwise would escape me, and they are another point of view, which is always welcome. But maybe authors will feel different about this, they may see a fellow writing negative reviews as disloyal and unsupportive.

    And finally, before this becomes another example of tl;dr, I just want to say that you have ruined that cover for me. I didn’t notice that, and now all I can see is a huge, angry vagina! (Loved that book, BTW)

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      See, I’m all for snarky reviews, just not all the time, like you said. And I get bored by the tl;dr ones. After a few paragraphs/pages, I get it. Most readers don’t continue a series they aren’t enjoying. No suprises there. I’d rather move on.

      LOL about the cover. I didn’t say anything when the book came out because I was afraid it would put readers off. But now I’m proud of the resemblence. I am very pro-vagina!

      Reply
  5. Jessica

    My view on snark has evolved, and now I tend think of it as just one of the tools in the reviewer’s toolbox. I tend not to use it much, but when I have, it’s been for a book I didn’t care for. That said, some bloggers, like AnimeJune at Gossamer Obsessions, manage to write pretty positive reviews that contain some snark. So I don’t think a snarky review has to be a really negative one, although I admit it almost always is.

    As for reading snarky reviews… I confess I haven’t enjoyed the occasional snarky guest reviews at SBTB, the recent snarky guest reviews at DA, or any others. Tl;dr about covers it.

    I wonder if snark’s time has come and gone? These days I get turned off pretty fast by a smug, wisecracking tone. But maybe that’s just me.

    Reply
  6. Jessica

    D’oh! the whole point of commenting was to thank Jill for linking to me, and to thank Lime for getting you to write this terrific post!

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      Aw, thanks. I was going to link to one of the SBTB guest reviews also. I’ve noticed a few recently.

      Interesting that you bring up Anime June. She is a genius at snark! And an aspiring author as well, I believe. Now I’m rethinking my stance. It would be a real shame if she toned it down after she got published.

      Reply
  7. willaful

    Some issues I see with the line-by-line critiques (besides the length) is that a) Inevitably the reviewer starts reaching for stuff to complain about, which makes her look foolish, and b) they tend to reuse the same phrases, which is boring. (And probably a good indicator that the critique is not “organic.”

    Which is not to say I never read or enjoy them.

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      I’m sure that the long reviews are honest, which is important. I stop reading after a page at most, so I haven’t noticed any reaching/repetition. But it makes sense. There’s only so many ways you can say the heroine is TSTL (or whatever).

      Reply
  8. jillsorenson

    @Avery Flynn

    No, I don’t think Harper Lee should be criticized for an excellent portrayal. This reviewer goes after authors who use stereotypes or are insensitive/ignorant.

    Using myself as an example, I just read a book set in Nazi Germany with no Jewish characters. I found it jarring and said so in my review, questioning the author’s priorities/sympathies. Maybe I crossed the line but I think there are some instances in which the author’s personal beliefs come through in the novel and are open for criticism. That is a new realization for me and I might change my mind. It’s a case-by-case basis. 😉

    Reply
  9. Amber Lin (@authoramberlin)

    When I get the impression someone is reading a book they don’t think they’ll like just for the intention of writing a snarky review…. I’m not interested. To me, that is more like talking to hear yourself speak, not about having something to say. But when it happens organically, like you said, and someone thought they’d like a book, wanted to like it, but ends up writing a snarky review…. those can be pretty funny 🙂

    Reply
  10. shallowreader

    Why is it that Mad Magazine authors get celebrated when they write a line by line parody full of snark yet when a female reviewer does it, it is called “mean”? Is it in the delivery? Is it gender expectations? Is it the authority of a published author in an established medium over a reviewer with no clear credentials using social media? I’m not sure of any of these answers but your post certainly made me think about these points.

    I know that words, criticisms and sarcasm are hurtful and to be subjected to it in a public forum makes it even more so. However, if a written work is made public, then the reader of that work is able to make both welcomed and unwelcome, informed and ill-informed comments. And no-one can dictate etiquette (though many would like to) to the reader/commenter nor the writer’s response.

    Reply
    1. Limecello Post author

      shallowreader – I definitely think there is a double standard and that’s not only annoying, it’s wrong. Boy howdy did I get into some dust ups early on when I started reviewing because I don’t only write positive reviews.
      There were a number of people up in arms who said I was simply mean spirited, or jealous of authors. [Which is probably why I’m so determinedly “I’m not an author! Nor do I want to be one.” out there.]

      That being said, I don’t think being mean for the sake of being mean should be okay for either gender. What’s the point of putting someone down to make yourself feel good?

      It’s difficult, because, from one perspective/generally… isn’t that the point of snark? Shredding something apart so people will exclaim over how clever and witty I am! I guess it depends on the material. And the audience.

      Because, I’ve definitely done some spoofy “summaries” before. (Although not as blog posts. Perhaps I should because those are quite funny.)

      And even – the person who is snarking. Where is s/he coming from? What’s his/her background, even current emotional state, so on and so forth. What’s the purpose – good clean fun? Or cutting remarks to make the subject bleed?

      Basically, I don’t have answers or “rules” – but it’s definitely a lot to think about, isn’t it?

      Reply
  11. shallowreader

    PS I think I forgot to mention that I enjoy parody and I particularly enjoy snarky reviews. Though, like all writing, it is the quality of the snark that will impact on my enjoyment.

    Reply
  12. Mary Kirkland (@scarymary66)

    I don’t have a problem with snarky reviews as long as the snark is projected about the book’s contents and not the author personally. I think we should be able to write a review in whatever way we choose to.

    So let me get this straight, if I ever write a book I am not allowed to ever say anything bad about another book ever again? I would still be a reader so I should be able to write reviews on the books I read. That doesn’t even make any sense.

    Not everyone is going to like each and every book and authors that write books should know that by now. You can’t please everyone all the time, don’t even try. But to get irrationally hurt by a review (Which is just someone’s opinion) and say something insulting to the reviewer I think is crossing the line. The reviewer has every right to say they didn’t like a particular book and state why.

    I don’t know of any, but if there are reviewers out there that pretty much only write snarky negative reviews to get attention…why would anyone take that reviewer seriously anyway? Read it, ignore it and move on. The last thing you want to do is call that reviewer out and make remarks that are only going to come back to bite you in the butt.

    Reply
    1. Limecello Post author

      Mary,

      I’m with you 100% on authors should be allowed to review. In fact, in a number of journals, etc, only authors are allowed to review. [Definitely mixed feelings on that, depending on what the publication is…] And I don’t think authors who review should only write positive ones. Maybe I’m too cynical, but it seems insincere, or just… I don’t know. Dishonest isn’t what I’m looking for/is too strong and accusatory.

      I also think an actual review is different than an off the cuff remark. Sure, authors can say “oh I loved this book!” e.g. on twitter, a facebook update, in random conversation.

      Hm… I just was about to type “it would be odd there to say ‘that book sucked.'” But as you said – why would it be odd? And yet – it is. You never see authors in the community talking about other romance novels being horrid publicly. But you know they think it.

      And based on experience… it depends on the author, and how much of a fuss was made. If the author is a big enough name, people won’t care. Others will still flock around her, and within a (very short) time period, all will not only be forgiven, but forgotten.

      As for the reviewers… I wish that were so, but again – what’s the saying – the proof is in the pie? That’s just not true. Everyone loves rubbernecking and drama, so those are actually the most popular posts. And… popularity breeds standing and influence. I didn’t check Smart Bitches much – but they’re something of an example (of a good way to go about doing it). Of course they do a lot of great things and non-snark too. (I wish my 1:20 AM brain could remember how things were when they started.) Some blogs start out that way and change, others it seems do it in hopes of attention. But then, I rarely blog hop, so really it’s just the sentiment I get from hearing the murmurs of the grapevine. 🙂

      Reply
      1. jillsorenson

        This happened recently with Jennifer Weiner, a big name author. She snarked on 50 Shades also and took some heat for it.

        Reply
    2. jillsorenson

      I definitely wasn’t saying that snarky reviews are “mean” or that authors shouldn’t write negative reviews. I write negative reviews. Some are a little bit snarky. So it’s hard for me to address this subject without sounding like a hypocrite.

      Of course authors can write negative, snarky reviews. But do readers accept them? Authors who snark on other authors generally get blasted for it and don’t continue. Maybe that will change.

      Reply
  13. Mary G

    Great Post! I’m so torn. Snarky reviews are like accidents. You don’t want to look but can’t take your eye away. I read the post and it was hilarious. But was it funny to the author? I might feel that way about a book but I’d share it with my book friends. I’d never put the words out there where they exist forever but I’m a wimp lol. To be fair, that review was totally analytical and she backed it up. I’m more concerned about reviews like “This is book 4 & I just didn’t get it. Maybe I should have read the first 3”. Duh – ya think? Also DNF – shoould there be a point you have to read to before it’s a DNF. Otherwise it’s a DNS – did not start.

    Reply
    1. Limecello Post author

      Mary –

      I agree/ think snarky reviews are so popular because of the accident analogy. The rubbernecking.
      I disagree you should have to take the author’s feelings into consideration when talking about the book only. (And I think we all agree one, when reviewing a book, should not make it about the author personally.) But I myself, think the “standard” should more be… would it be something you’d admit to saying in person? Or be ashamed of acknowledging? That’s basically my MO for … well everything. (Although I do say things in confidence to people that I wouldn’t expect to be broadcast.)

      I guess her again we go by who the person is (or is purported to be?) … No real answer.

      Reply
  14. jillsorenson

    @Limecello

    I’m responding to one of the comments from the top–can’t seem to reply up there. As far as reviewers being cutthroat with each other, I don’t see it. Sure, they (we) call out Story Siren or talk about issues, but blasting another reviewer’s style/grammar/etiquette isn’t done. Someone might say “reviewers should use the author’s last name in a review.” They don’t say “Katiebabs uses the author’s first name and that’s rude!”

    Or do they? From my perspective, reviewers are just as supportive of each other as authors.

    I didn’t see Armentrout’s common sense comment, but I can imagine her frustration with being confused for Armintrout. I follow both of the A-trouts on twitter and I’m trying not to get into trouble with either of them so I’ll stop there.

    Reply
    1. Limecello Post author

      Jill – you can actually only hit reply so many times (dunno why WP does that) – but if you hit “reply” in the same thread where it’s still visible it’ll go there. … >.> If that made sense.

      Well, heh. I’m definitely not going to “air” the dirty laundry here. But… that’s not what I’m talking about/all there is to it.

      Oh I can 100% and more understand Armentrout’s frustration for totally harassing her about something she a) didn’t do, b) even more had absolutely no control over, and c) really was from rather stupid people who didn’t even bother fact checking. It just… didn’t help the situation/ further proof sometimes you have an “oops.”

      Reply
  15. Janet W

    There’s snark and then there’s snark and imo, Jennifer Weiner deserved that heat. She’s built somewhat of a reputation for pointing out the different ways novels written by women are handled when it comes to reviews from say a place like the New York Times. And then she snark tweets a book written by a women, that she hadn’t read, that was starting to get some considerable sales traction. What did she expect? She then read it and didn’t care for it and shared that, fine, no prob.

    You gotta know I’m going to buy Andrew Shaffer’s Fifty Shades parody–he read and dissected that book ten ways to Sunday. Works for me.

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      Oh really? I thought Weiner snarked after she read it. This is interesting– Armintrout tweeted that Schaffer gets a pass because he’s male. I think he gets a pass because he’s funny. He also knows the romance genre. I don’t know if the same can be said for Weiner.

      Reply
      1. Moira Rogers (Bree) (@moirarogersbree)

        [okay, you told me to leave the epic comment, lime! LOL]

        I really disliked the argument that Schaffer got a pass because he’s male. I think comparing the place within the industry of someone who has primarily written reviews, non-fiction and satiric commentary to the place of someone who writes fiction in the same genre as the work being parodied is extremely disingenuous, and does a lot to undermine the (very, very real) double-standard that exists. I think Schaffer gets a pass because most of us already associate him with snarky commentary on whatever publishing seems to be hyping this week.

        But that doesn’t mean I dislike snark. I think everyone should get to say whatever they want all the time, pretty much…but I desperately wish we could all put aside the worry over whether or not it was mean. I don’t really think author feelings should factor in to the situation, because bluntly put: my feelings are no one’s business. I can decide that any review anyone wrote is mean if I want to. I can have my feelings hurt from dawn until dusk and that’s my right as a human being. I didn’t abdicate it when I published a book. What I did give up, though, is the right to behave immaturely and unprofessionally without being penalized for it. And if anyone can tell that my feelings are hurt, then I’m doing it wrong.

        That’s where I think the real double-standard is. We’re all obsessed with whether or not something is mean, and I wonder if it’s because none of us will give ourselves permission to do something that is going to hurt someone else’s feelings. I wonder if men feel obligated by society to make sure they don’t make comments that might make another man feel bad, and to spend endless rounds debating whether or not X or Y comment was “too” mean or not mean enough, and who has the right to be upset .

        Next time someone says a snarky review was too mean, I would LOVE it if our response was, “So what, grow up and deal with it” instead of the rush to defend why it wasn’t. I may be a woman, but that does not make me genetically obligated to be kind and nurturing 24/7. Neither does anyone else. They can hurt my feelings all they want–I’m an adult, and a professional. I’ll deal with it.

        Reply
      2. Limecello Post author

        @Bree I’m not sure – I think gender actually does matter. Would Schaffer have gotten so much love – or at the other end tolerance – if he was a woman, who came into the genre snarking about it? Of course I don’t know his entire background, or what he’s done… All I know is he “appeared” around the scene in 2010 when he went to RT for a writing thing and decided he was interested in writing a romance novel?

        I don’t know if … hm. Well first of all, obviously I have no “answers” or rules/standards. I think whether something is mean or not depends on the person it’s coming from, and his/her intent. If a person sets out to be cruel and hurt someone, why not call her on it? Why does she get a free pass for being a giant bitch? Then again, sometimes you have the “eggshell author” [hahaha sorry, horrible badly done appropriation of the eggshell skull plaintiff] – and the reviewer shouldn’t be held responsible for what would 99.99999% of the time not happen. Because interwebz isn’t teh lawz. Or… should it be?

        With this wishy washy response – it’s again all down to a “case by case” instance. If the review is only about a book – yeah – leave it. If the review “descends” into a personal attack… the reviewer should be called out for it, imo. Do we burn her at the stake? No – but at that point, the criticism can flow both ways.

        I think that response would be fabulous – if both parties owned up to it. Author saying my feelings are my issue, and snarky reviewer saying “yes – I was snarky and mean.”

        So… in the end all my babbling means nothing, and I agree – how I’m interpreting your phrase… is we should all use common sense and be reasonable, if not rational. (I think a big part, if not the majority of the internet would be so bored/disappointed.)

        Reply
  16. jillsorenson

    Moira/Bree,

    This is such a good point, about Schaffer’s role in the community. It IS different for an author reviewing another author in the same genre. And I totally agree with you that the author’s feelings shouldn’t be a factor. As an author, I want reviewers to be honest and pull no punches. Being nice or polite or quiet isn’t helpful to me. Snarky reviews lead to sales. I love them! Hurt my feelings, please!

    But I would hesitate to remove feelings from this equation altogether. Because when there is no moral debate, what’s left? Ethics. Professionalism. I can’t go there because I don’t consider snark unprofessional. Obviously I don’t consider author-reviewing unprofessional. When the two meet, is that unprofessional? I don’t know if it’s fair to say that, even though I recommend against it in the post.

    What I’m getting at is–if snark isn’t mean or unprofessional, why do we need to make a distinction between Schaffer doing it and an author in the same genre doing it? Obviously he isn’t going to be called a mean girl. So his gender is relevant here. I also understand that authors reviewing in their own genre (romance) or subgenre (erotic romance) are more likely to be seen as jealous and questioned about conflicts of interest. But how can I criticize this when *I* review in my own genre?

    You see the problem with this topic. Everywhere I go, I paint myself into a corner!

    Reply
    1. Moira Rogers (Bree) (@moirarogersbree)

      I will go out on a limb here and admit that while I find snark both enjoyable and witty, I do think there’s a somewhat narrow arena in which I’d consider it professional. To me, this is one of those times where there’s a line between behaving unprofessionally and not being a professional. There’s a lot of freedom in not being a professional–you don’t have to worry about putting your job in jeopardy and you can decide what level of effort, accountability and trouble is worth the time you expend. And if you cross lines…well, the possible fall-out is probably a lot less severe too.

      I would have never snarked at my programming job. I wouldn’t have sent snarky e-mails to coworkers or clients, I wouldn’t have cracked sarcastic jokes during meetings. It would not have been professional behavior, and it probably would have gotten me in trouble. But I felt perfectly comfortable coming home and getting online to snark about TV shows or post reviews of movies. That’s a low-risk activity for me, because I’m not a professional there. I’m just a consumer, and so I’m not held to a professional standard of behavior.

      The lines get blurry for authors, I totally admit that. Especially with social media. There is a part of me that knows I’m never “off” anymore. Everything I say in public is part of my professional persona, and I have to draw my own lines about where I consider my professional obligation to start & stop. For me, it’s books. That doesn’t mean I think that’s the only answer, it’s just my comfortable risk threshold. And it doesn’t mean I would never say a negative thing about a book–I’d just approach it the way I would any job. Carefully.

      (The arena where I DO find snark professional would be people who are professionally funny, btw. And I DO think Schaffer falls in that category, with all the privileges–and risks–that entails. It takes a braver person than I to build a brand on something as volatile as scathing wit!)

      Reply
  17. jillsorenson

    I’m nodding along with everything you’re saying, but it’s the same argument used against author-reviewing, period. Criticizing coworkers publicly is a risky endeavor; agreed. I’m not going to say it’s unprofessional, because I think that would be like the pot calling the kettle black. And I do plenty of things online that I wouldn’t do at a faculty meeting, like cursing and talking about sex. A creative arena is not the same as an office building. And don’t get me started on how authors should dress (not too sexy! or we won’t be taken seriously!)

    I get what you’re saying though, especially about authors being “on” all the time. Everyone has a different comfort threshold and choosing our words carefully is a must. Is there such a thing as careful, thoughtful snark? Yes, I think so.

    I also think that we can be too careful, polite, and diplomatic, never revealing anything meaningful about ourselves. The internet would be pretty boring if we all behaved as if we were sitting at a board meeting.

    Reply
    1. Moira Rogers (Bree) (@moirarogersbree)

      You’re right, there’s a definite line. After I left this comment last night, I got in the shower and thought about how I wished I’d been able to explain why I think snark (while requiring thought & effort & wit) is different and somehow MORE than just reviewing. And I think, too me, it’s about the focus. I can’t help but feel that a review is about a book, but a snarky review is at least partly about the wit of the person writing it. For me, a good snarky review is almost performance art–it’s not about the product anymore. I love Mrs. Giggles and I love books, but I don’t love Mrs. Giggles because she reviews books. She could review lawn mowers or toasters, and I’d still read her reviews because I’m only tangentially interested in the product she’s reviewing–I’m there because she makes me laugh and makes me gasp and is freaking hysterical.

      But now I’ve argued myself in a circle, because maybe my real distaste is watching people take someone else’s work and make it all about how awesome and clever their similar works are by comparison. But I suppose that’s not even unprofessional in any field, it’d just be considered good business. So maybe all I’ve really managed to do is explain why I dropped out of business school. 😉 And that this topic is complicated!

      Reply
  18. Kate Hewitt

    I’m not big on snarky reviews. They feel to me to be more about the reviewer than the review, or in fact the book being reviewed. In fact, I think the first few snarky reviews, whenever they happened, have spawned this whole genre of writing funny/snarky reviews, which is a talent, but not really, in my mind, a review, since the object seems to be to amuse rather than offer an informed opinion or criticism of the book. I’m not going to get into the whole what-constitutes-a-review debate, suffice it to say, snarky reviews are not for me. A respectful, well-reasoned criticism of a book is fine by me.

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      Makes sense, Kate. It is a different sort of review, and not necessarily what I’m looking for as a reader. I prefer a short summary and discussion of what worked/didn’t work with examples. When the purpose is to entertain, I wonder if the reviewer ignores some of the book’s good qualities because they aren’t funny…

      Reply
      1. willaful

        “When the purpose is to entertain, I wonder if the reviewer ignores some of the book’s good qualities because they aren’t funny…”

        I have seen snarky reviews that were truly misleading about a book and that bugs me a lot. I may exaggerate to make a point in a review (and I hope it’s clear when I do), but I don’t make stuff up up.

        On the other hand, if a book really annoys me, I just may not see or care about any good qualities. It made me crazy and that’s all that exists for me. Similarly, if I love a book, I may not see or care about its flaws. If I were a pro reviewer for the New York Review of Books, that would be inappropriate, but I’m an enthusiastic amateur writing reviews based on my thoughts and feelings. That’s what I need to be honest about.

        Reply
    2. Limecello Post author

      Kate – excellent point! I think we’d be much more ok with it if a snarky “review” of a book wasn’t labeled as a review perhaps? Maybe a qualifier, or a discussion, or something else. Because I think everyone is agreeing that snarky reviews, to varying degrees aren’t about the book. Some mostly are, but some barely talk about the book itself, and instead highlight certain lines.

      The latter can be vastly entertaining and enjoyable. But would it be a review? I don’t know/don’t think so. Taking certain lines out of context you can make anything (sound) horrible.

      Reply
  19. Jody W. & Meankitty

    I don’t think the OP is saying that snarky Mad Magazine gets a pass and snarky reviews shouldn’t. This isn’t necessarily the dreaded double standard at work here. It’s apples/oranges. Both tasty, but they come from different trees :).

    Mad Magazine is doing parody — of everything, whether the magazine author “likes” the original or not. Most snarky reviews are premised on the reviewer thoroughly disliking the original. (*AnimeJune being a delightful exception, among others.) Schaffer, I gather, is doing parody and not qualitatively assessing the original book with snark, although those in Romancelandia familiar with him probably know he wasn’t impressed with the book. But he could still have written a hiliarious parody had he liked the original, because parody is a different fruit than snarky review, even if there is some overlap.

    Another, more self-serving example…I’ve been “cattifying” people’s books and covers lately. It’s fun. It makes me laugh. These cattifications are parody and are certainly not judgments on the original. Were I to write snarky reviews of those books or covers, those would be judgments of the original.

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      Interesting point, Jody. I agree that parodies don’t have the same negative connotation. RRR Jessica wrote a hilarious review of Passion by Lisa Valdez, which I think she enjoyed. I know I enjoyed both the review and the book. It’s true that some snark isn’t biting or meant as a judgment on the original.

      Reply
  20. Jennifer Blake

    A review is, by definition, the careful analysis of a work. To descend to ridicule masked as wit while writing one shows scant respect for the art and its traditions. That’s on top of a breath-taking lack of responsibility. Words are dangerous weapons; they can shatter dreams and destroy hope, as the more vicious sites may well discover if some author slashes her wrists after having her book torn apart there. Short of that, how many writers have been so discouraged that they are now flipping burgers instead of writing? Can anyone say with certainty that those writers might not have published something bold and beautiful if given a chance?

    As for authors reviewing the work of other authors, that’s fine if done in even-handed, intelligent fashion–but to post snarky comments about the work of another wordsmith borders on TSTL behavior. Writers have long memories, fast keyboards and large circles of friends in the business. Gouge their book, and they may gouge yours when and where you least expect it. It’s just human nature. Civility is the best policy.

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      I don’t feel that reviewers (who are not authors) have any responsibility to be respectful, careful, or gentle with an author’s delicate feelings.

      I think that silence kills books, not snark. Funny reviews lead to sales and generate interest. You are basically trying to shame reviewers by suggesting that authors are going to slash their wrists over a review. This is the kind of attitude that discourages honest criticism and stifles word of mouth.

      Also, it’s not “nice” or civil to threaten to gouge others as payback. You say it’s human nature, but this isn’t the kind of behavior I expect from my peers. I think better of them.

      Reply
    2. Limecello Post author

      Jennifer,

      I don’t really know how to respond/what I think about it from an author standpoint because I’m not one.

      But – were I to attempt to put myself in one’s shoes… I don’t think it’d be fair to hold a reviewer responsible for an author reacting in such an extreme fashion as to stop writing, or to (God forbid) end her life. Authors put their books out there – to be criticized, loved, or be indifferent to. If a person can’t handle criticism… well frankly, beyond not writing – where would that person be in any other field?

      I hope I’m not derailing the discussion – but tearing a book apart in a reasonable manner – pointing out grammer, plottting, etc – the basic “lit crit” check list – I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. At all. The reviewer also gave up time, and possibly money too. [Here we’re dangerously going to another topic that annoys me – you can’t criticize a book because how long the author spend on it.]

      Were I an author would I be happy about such a critical review? No. Absolutely not. Obviously. But if I actually wanted to write, I wouldn’t let it stop me, or crush me.

      I don’t think, however, that a reviewer should ever make it personal – as in veiling a book review as a criticism of the author as a person.

      Reply
  21. Mary G

    I forgot this part. It’s one thing to read a book and be snarky about it. To deliberately read the second one to snark some more… I can’t imagine. I have a full-time job. I barely have time to read the books I have to read & want to read.

    Reply
  22. jillsorenson

    @willaful

    I’ve had the exact experience, of loving a book with flaws but not mentioning them in the review because they didn’t matter to me. And some books I’ve hated so much that I didn’t want to mention any positives. That is totally a reviewer’s prerogative. I don’t think anyone should feel obligated to include positive comments. Focusing on the negatives only isn’t misleading, unless the reviewer actually enjoyed the book and doesn’t want to admit it for whatever reason.

    I thought about this some more and realized that what I like is an overview, or an overall impression of the book. If it’s a C or average read, give examples of good & bad. If it’s an B and no flaws are mentioned, I wonder why it’s not an A. Does that make sense?

    A snarky line-by-line analysis is just not for me because I’m focused on the big picture, bottom line, whatever. I’m also an impatient reader and like fast-paced books, which might be related.

    Reply
    1. jillsorenson

      @willaful

      Argh! I forgot to say that I enjoy your reviews at KKB. I’m going to check out Kathleen Eagle.

      Reply
  23. jillsorenson

    I want to thank everyone for the thoughtful comments. It’s a tough subject and I feel awkward about raising it as an author. I worry that both sides (authors and reviewers) sort of look at me like I’m not one of them. So I really appreciate everyone being open with me and sharing your honest opinions.

    Thanks Lime!!

    Feel free to keep the comments coming. I will check back. 🙂

    Reply
  24. Bella @BeguileThySorrow

    I think it’s all so subjective that there’ll never be a real consensus on where “the line” is. I’m not good at catching on to sarcasm and snark so I avoid it and I don’t often find it funny except for a few comedians lol.
    As for the long reviews, theyre not my preference at all. I like brevity and a review that doesn’t give away all the secrets of the the book. Because why would I read it if you just ruined the cliffhanger for me?! But I always run into people who are opposite of me and actually prefer knowing what’s going to happen- but it makes no sense to me and I dont read their comments or reviews lol

    Reply
  25. BarkLessWagMore (@FMMFC)

    I’m late to the party but just wanted to add that I enjoy snark but not overly long reviews. When I clicked on the review linked at DA and saw how long it was I have to admit that I shut the window without reading more than 2 paragraphs. I sometimes do the same thing when reviewers include too many excerpts from the book. I guess I have a poor attention span because I like a little plot, a little commentary and a neat wrap-up.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to LimecelloCancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.