Gem4Life
Right now, I'm on the fence about it. Her book is bad and she doesn't want to take any criticism so she can improve. And shes clearly just milking her audience. As I think about it more and more, I might just write her off too. Its no fun if the author just goes back on their word...
Authors deleting reviews
Lilliny You should just let her do her thing. I think you are wasting your time by doing that as she will only delete your review again and again. Since she does not want to improve then let it go. Not many contracted novels are earning a lot. They rely on the guarantee system most-if not all of the time.
TheBlips I agree. You cannot help someone who doesn't want it. It's futile to even try.
LostInFictions True. Also some people find it hard to accept that some people are criticizing their hard work. As a new writer, I remember crying after i receive my first constructive criticism. I mean... I know my grammar is bad but having someone shove it in my face hurts. hahahah The truth hurts and not everyone can cope with that. Which is sad since we need constant criticism to improve and grow.
- Edited
Lilliny such a fool and a liar, you deleted it cause the shit in there where too much. There's no way the author will delete a review which is clearly defending her and anyone buying your shit has the same shit head that you have. You all be here talking shits about another persons book, men. Take heart because you niggas need help
- Edited
Any nigga talking rubbish about this author book needs help! And you gren ..whatever you name is, go leave another review on his book and I bet you that you'll not only regret writing it but also regret the day you were born. You and that stupid boy Lilley whatever. You want to write another review, go and do it but I know you can't because you're scared, you claim he deletes his reviews but you deleted the one you wrote when his fans tried to correct you. I wise they'd see this post. You're so childish and stupid.
Last I checked a review represents the view of the reviewer, and it pertains to the written works, not the author. What bloody moron expects the reviewer to actively start defending an author?
Go home, look up the word 'review' in a thesarius and apply that new knowledge. If you don't understand the word thesarius there are probably kind people on this thread more than willing to explain in terms of words with two wovels or less.
- Edited
StenDuring Go home look the word review and you ain't gonna see where they say: I bet the author doesn't have any sexual experience or had a bad sexual experience.
Now I'm gonna explain to you what reviews are for. They're where you complain that something don't work, where you leave meaningful complain that isn't up to your satisfaction and that others doesn't know about. Reviews section isn't a place where you rant that a book is stupid just because you mistakenly came across a genre that isn't what you like. I know this author and he'll tell you repeatedly that her book need editing, not that it truly needs it. Don't complain about the plot, author's ain't gonna rewrite there book just cause you don't like it. Every story is unique in there own way.
Complain about the grammar, about the mistake but only argue the plot with the characters and if a book is rapey or incest which ain't what you like, dude leave there. Their are niggas who like that type of shit. All you niggas are misinterpreting the word review. Don't go to a book which the title clearly stated that there will be lots of killing and then go to the review section to write: "stupid author, all the ML knows about is kill innocent people." very funny how you niggas with low mentality be thinking sometimes.
[unknown] You're so childish and stupid.
The irony in this statement is just...wow.
Just so you know, I read OJROMANCE's book and I didn't write a review, nor did I "shittalk" it, so before you jump in and start insulting me for being stupid and insulting other people, make sure you're not just lashing out at everyone who merely disagrees with you.
before_after lol from your words,I feel like author didn't say he'll get his powers in first thirty chapters and work for his revenge. Maybe he wanted to grow the characters before doing it
While I agree with you that a reviewer had better stay away from a disliked genre I'll clearly state that you're plain wrong as far as the other subtopics go.
Given that I'm able to (in my role as a reviewer) present a succint, albeit subjective, opinion about a given work a review will contain at least the following:
1) character depiction
2) narrative
3) adherence to genre
4) good and bad points of the story within the scope of the genre for its supposed demography
Observe that the language used normally isn't part of a review, unless we're talking literary fiction, since mastery of the language ususally is taken for granted. Poor spelling, grammar and sentence structure is basically something new that came along with webpublications. Basically those stories would never pass through the very first filter in traditional publishing.
I did write that a review is subjective. It not only has to be, but it is supposed to be as well. A review is the reviewer's personal opinion about a work, backed up by more or less valid credentials as a reviewer. In the world of reviews some people have a better, or rather more powerful, reputation compared to others. In that sense it's the same as for authors.
For that very reason a reviewer will seldom make it known that they know the author. That kind of relationship undermines the validity of a review, in as much as a review could ever be valid to begin with.
Now, as for opinions about content, making it clear that a story is disturbing due to being "rapey or incest" is perfectly valid. A review is primarily written for other potential readers. It's reader faced, not author faced, and its function therefore is to give a new reader an idea about what is to be expected. If a story carry a set of human values which go contrary to the norm you'd expect to find that pointed out. This would be true no matter if the values presented are worse or better than the norm. Since there's a difference from some kind of standard values the reviewer will implicitly clearly make his/her views of that standard known.
Even if a story makes it abundantly clear that there will be a huge body count concerning innocent people a review that voices an opinion about the depiction of those killings is clearly doing its job. A reviewer stating that a work is a disturbing piece of disgusting crap because it glorifies the raping of recently killed humans is perfectly valid. Reading the review I get an understanding that the reviewer firmly believes there's no excuse for presenting said violations in a rose tinted light. I may or may nor agree with the reviewer (well I personally would agree) and either pick up or not pick up the story based on that review.
The main mistake with the rant I'm currently replying to is that it carries the notion that a reviewer owes the author anything. Nothing could be further from the truth. The reviewer, if owing anyone anything at all, writes for the readers -- the reviewer being one him/herself. As a reviewer I should avoid the idea that an author is some kind of special snowflake and focus on what I believe are the credits or demerits of a story. Nothing else.
- Edited
Tomoyuki I ain't gonna lash out at you cause you did nothing but I'm gonna defend my post you replied to. It's mine. I called him childish cause the nigga read and wrote his review out of spite, stupid cause after deleting the review he came back to the forum to pop up more people and even said he will write another review over and over again. I saw those who even supported him and I'm like ..men, baby girl, this people ain't thinking from there head but thy eir arsecheek.