Elem, slučajno sam naletela na ovaj dole blog, i na interesantan post na njemu. Doduše, stvar se dešava tamo napolju, gde pisci imaju agente, što ovde nije slučaj; svejedno, interesuje me šta ovdašnji pisci (u prevodu, u ovom slučaju, ljudi sa objavljenom knjigom, ili više objavljenih knjiga) misle o tome, i kakva su njihova iskustva po tom pitanju. A pitanje o kome govorim je iskreno i otvoreno izražavanje mišljenja (na sopstvenom blogu, na forumu, na svom sajtu, na Fejsu, wherever) o tome da je neka knjiga loša, i mogućim posledicama toga.
Dobrodošla su i mišljenja ostalih, ali bih volela da znam kakva su iskustva ovdašnji pisci imali s tim.
Evo i tog (podužeg) posta:
Being published changes everything
Last night I participated in #Querychat on Twitter. And one of the participants asked about her online reviews; I think it was whether she should link to her blog in a query. The agent who answered, Jill Corcoran, basically said, "Go ahead and link if you want, but it's a good idea to take off any bad reviews of any of the agent's clients before you do, and the same goes for editors."
This led into quite a long discussion, in which I, of course, poked my nose.
The asker asked if by "bad" reviews Jill meant nasty/mean ones, or if she just meant reviews where they didn't like the book. Jill and I both replied–and I believe Weronika Janczuk, another agent, joined us as well, in saying...well, yeah, even just reviews where they didn't like the book.
The thing is, I think people tend to forget that agents sign clients because they love their work. Yes, they think it'll sell, but that's part of loving it. My agent? Loves my work. Likes reading what I write, and wants to read it, and looks forward to reading it (which is the way it should be). So if you hate my work because it's nothing like the stuff you like, which presumably is the sort of thing you write...well, your work is probably pretty different from the kind of thing my agent likes, right? So there's one strike against you.
I mentioned that I personally would be rather hurt if my agent signed someone who'd trashed me/my work, or even just said negative things about me/my work online. My friend Yasmine Galenorn agreed with me, and said she wouldn't help that person out, either, like with a blurb or whatever. Which I agree with, as well.
The Asker was surprised. She didn't think authors would get so angry over a bad review.
But it's not anger. It's not anger at all, really; I can't think of a review of my work that's ever made me angry, to be honest. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and to express that opinion wherever and whenever. But...the purpose of a review, the whole reason reviews came about and exist, is to tell people whether or not they should read that book/buy that TV/use that hair gel/wear those shoes. That's what a review is, and what it does. You may do a lot of other stuff along with your reviews, and use them to start long involved discussions, but the fact is, people read reviews first and foremost to see if the product–in this case a book–is worth buying.
In other words, you're querying an agent whose client's book you've publicly told people not to buy. If you ask that author for a blurb, or promo help, or a guest blog, you're asking for help from someone whose book you publicly told people not to buy.
But it's not about anger or revenge or anything like that, it really isn't. As I said, you have every right in the world to have and share an opinion on my books. That's not up to me. But if you didn't like my work and then you ask me for help, I'm going to feel used. I'm good enough to help you out–to permit you to use my name to sell your books–but not good enough for you to recommend my book(s), apparently. I hate to sound like a bitch here, but why should I help you, in that case? (In fact, this very situation came up with a friend of mine a few months ago. She was asked to blurb an author who'd previously given her book a very nasty review; not a bad review, but a truly nasty one with personal comments. Do you think she agreed to blurb the book? If you guessed "Hell no!" you're right.)
(I will say, though, that while I wouldn't help the person sell books, I would and have still help[ed] them. I've had a few people over the years who were unpleasant to me personally and who later asked me for advice/help. I helped them, and I was happy to do it because I don't want to see anyone treated badly, and I believe strongly that we should all help each other as much as we can. A little while back a small group of micropress writers decided it would be fun to say some very nasty things about me, and I saw it. I'll help those women if they ever ask me to; in fact, I have helped them already, in several ways, though they likely don't see it that way. But while I might give them advice about this agent or that publisher, and I certainly won't actively work to their detriment, I'm still not going to help them sell their book. There's a line there.)
You never know whose help you might need one day.
The Asker was quite upset about this, so it seemed. She didn't want to post positive reviews only because then no one would trust her, so she was desperately trying to figure out how she could word negative reviews and still have a good shot with agents etc. etc. But–to get to the thesis line of today's little post–at some point she's going to have to decide if she's a reader/reviewer or a writer. Period.
The fact is, when you decide to become a writer you give up some of your personal freedoms. When you sell your first book you give up even more. There's no getting around that, and there's no changing it. You can no longer say exactly what you think exactly the way you think it at all times. You can no longer assume that only the people you're familiar with are reading your blog or your tweets. You no longer have the luxury of an opinion, honestly, on a lot of things.
(This isn't to say that writers shouldn't ever write negative reviews. I don't believe that. But it does mean that if you want to write one, you need to be prepared for the fact that some people will not be inclined to help you or work with you after you have.)
Look at how many online scandals break out because authors simply forget where they are, or to whom they're speaking. They mean one thing but it sounds like another thing, or their words are taken in an entirely different way that they never thought of. Or they're just venting. Whatever.
You can do that as a reader. You can vent, you can moan, you can tell everyone that you hate Person X. Nobody bats an eye if you do so, really. But if you're a writer and you vent, someone's going to pick it up, and it'll become a discussion topic. If you moan, someone's going to think you're acting entitled and that you're obviously not a good person. If you vent someone is going to get pissed. That's just the way it works.
The more books you sell, the less you're allowed to say, at least until you're a Name–a real Name, like more-than-three-books-on-the-NYT Name–when you're pretty much allowed to say whatever you like again.
This is so easy to forget. Like for me, Twitter is ephemeral. It's there one second, gone the next. And no one sees your feed unless they've chosen to, and you assume people choose to because they like you/your books, so you feel as though you're talking exclusively to fans/people who like you. So it's easy to vent or discuss something or whatever there and think of it as a small private discussion among people who care and want to be nice to you. Then you discover that no, it's being passed around, that people are forming opinions of you–often negative opinions–based on what you said while upset, or in a mood, or shocked, or whatever.
It's not just reviews, either, not at all. Once you become published you're no longer free to express an opinion on a variety of publishing topics. Ebook pricing? My lips are sealed, man. Release dates? Sealed. Gossip? Sealed. Not because I'm afraid of whatever blowback there may be, necessarily, but because I simply don't want to get into it. I don't enjoy controversy and I certainly don't court it; it can and has made me physically ill. (Honestly, I spent a good part of my summer throwing up because of the stress of the book releases and the mess that surrounded them, especially the first; it was extremely difficult for me.) There are writers out there who do, who love nothing more than a good debate and whose blogs reflect that. That's fine for them.
(I'll say this, too. Remember how we talked about how men's books aren't judged the same way women's are? Ask yourself this. When is the last time you saw a statement from a man's blog become a big internet to-do?)
It's not just what you say, either. It's how people take you. People suddenly read all sorts of things into your words that you didn't mean and didn't expect. Their reactions to you change; suddenly they're more aggressive, or more defensive. Suddenly you have enemies when you have no idea how you got them, and don't want them. A statement you might have made or a question you might have asked a year ago and been fine is suddenly a huge deal, and makes people angry. A discussion you might have happily had a year ago is suddenly scrutinized, and you always come off badly. Any sentence can be taken as you trying to push your books on people or make yourself look good, or will be seen as hypocritical just to suck up to someone.
When you do offer an opinion, it's assumed that you expect your opinion to be more important than that of others, even when that's not at all the case. I think that's the hardest thing, really; realizing you can no longer just hang out and chat, you have to be ever-vigilant. People will act friendly when they're not; they'll be nice to you because they want something.
There is an out. You can post anonymously/pseudonymously. I have a pseudonymous account on a science fiction/fantasy site/forum, where I get to just...be one of the gang. It's really fun, and they're great people. Some of them know who I am and some don't. It doesn't matter. They just like me, and I like them, and it's fun and a relief to be there (although I'm still careful what I say). I used to occasionally post pseudonymously on another site as well, simply because I didn't want it to look like I was trying to plug my books. But that gets tiring too sometimes, honestly. It's hard when people are talking about, say, what they'd love to see in UF, and your book is exactly that but you can't tell them because if anyone finds out it'll look like you're sock-puppeting to sell books, which is tacky beyond belief. It's hard when you try to explain something to someone–maybe someone is shilling a vanity press, say, and you try to refute them–and you get a "What the fuck do you know, I'm an expert. Oh, suuuure you're NY published. I totally believe you."
I'm not saying any of this to complain, I'm really not. Although it can be very confusing and depressing, and although it's weird to suddenly feel like people you don't know are paying attention to you/what you say and do like you're some fucking celebrity or something when you're totally not, I'm not complaining. I knew this–maybe not to the same degree, and certainly I never foresaw the changes in reactions to me–before I made my first sale, really. And I did the same things, made the same kinds of mistakes. I said things about books I didn't like, or authors I didn't like (I have since deleted all of that). I got involved in the online fun a little too much, and did and said things I regret doing and saying. Nothing I can do about it now; it's my own fault.
The truth is I'm lucky to be in this position, and I know it. I worked very hard to get even the small success I've managed to achieve. I'm not complaining at all. I'm not saying anyone doesn't have a right to their opinion blah blah blah, or that it's unfair that I should have to be civilized online. Watching what you say and not slamming people shouldn't be something people have to stop and think about; it should be something we do every day, everywhere.
But it is something I wanted very badly to get across to that girl at #Querychat last night. You cannot be a writer and a reader both, not publicly, not online (of course you can still read, you know what I mean). You cannot expect people to take your opinions as a writer in the same fashion they took them when you were a reader. Not ever. No matter how loudly you proclaim your belief in this or that, there will always be people who aren't aware of that (or think you're lying) and so take your words badly or in a way you didn't intend. No matter how hard you try to be kind and helpful, there will be people who think you're just doing it for show. No matter how reasonably you attempt to present your opinion, there will be people who think you're just an asshole writer who doesn't care about anybody else. No matter what, there will always be people who refuse to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Yes, part of this is simply the way of life. Especially today, when forgetting other people are human beings with feelings too and not simply toys for our amusement seems to be, if not the norm, all the rage, and when lots of people consider a good afternoon's entertainment to be sitting in front of their computer judging others harshly, secure in the knowledge that they themselves are faultless and have never made a mistake. We all have to be careful, all the time.
But it is a bit harder for writers, and I do believe that. And it's something anyone wishing to be published needs to be aware of, and prepared for. Being published changes things. It changes your life. The loss of some privacy and freedom is part of that.
You need to decide which matters more to you.
http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/915620-being-published-changes-everything (http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/915620-being-published-changes-everything)
Ja naravno nisam pisac pa moje mišljenje nije ni bitno, ali mislim da ovaj baja malo preoštro svodi svrhu rivjua na jednu funkciju a zanemaruje njegovu funkciju kritike u smislu promidžbe kuturnog diskursa jednog društva. Pa su u tom smislu i njegovi stavovi na temu malo prerigidni i čak prejednostavni iz mog ugla gledanja.
Stvarno me je mrzelo da pročitam do kraja, ali sam pročitao veći deo. Mislim da se pisac mnogo migolji šta i kad sme, a šta ne sme. A, prilično je jasno šta želi da kaže. Tim pre što na slična ponašanja nailazimo i kod nas i neretko ne znamo kakav stav da zauzmemo.
Da ne bih iznosio svoja iskustva :lol:, podržao bih tvoj predlog i rado bih saslušao šta drugi misle o mišljenju o knjigama i kakva su im iskustva o podršci, pomoći, ali i o uzvraćanju.
Stekao sam utisak da ona(valjda) mesa dve stvari u ovom postu: odredjenih ogranicenja pisca kao javne licnosti (bilo koje javne licnosti, dodao bih) i moralno/prakticni aspekt pisanja losih recenzija (ne mislim na kvalitet istih, jelte). Ne vidim bas neku vezu izmedju te dve stvari.
A, sto se tice svrhe recenzija, sto kolega nepisac pominje, treba baciti pogled ovamo: http://www.strangehorizons.com/blog/2011/01/towards_a_strange_horizons_rev_1.shtml (http://www.strangehorizons.com/blog/2011/01/towards_a_strange_horizons_rev_1.shtml)
Ima veze itekako. O tome stalno ovde divanimo. Samo čitač do pisca u pokušaju može bezobavezno da se istrese na bilo koju knjigu. Ima čovek/žena mišljenje pa to ti je. Pisac koji se udene u knjigu odjednom dolazi u poziciju da mora da se preispituje šta je ranije trtljao naokolo. Imperija uzvraća udarac, zar ne? Kasnije, kao etablirani pisac, može opet tajke na batajke. E, sad, postavlja se pitanje gde je tu objektivnost? Tamo gde i mog drugara S. Ivkova koji javno izjavi da će mi prikaz za knjigu pisati njegova bivša žena, jer smo oko njenog integriteta imali nesuglasicu pre dvadeset i kusur godina. Dakle, jedno je čitalac koji ima stav o svom čitanju javno na Internetu, a drugo pisac koji u nastajanju bezobzirno nasrće na one koji su trenutno bolje kotirani, pa i sam stigne na "dobro jutro". Naravno, tu se mnogo šta ne može ispraviti, ali dobro je da znamo da nismo "izvan sveta", te da i drugi imaju "duševnu bol" kad ih neko, neočekivano, izgazi. Mogu ja još, ali mi se potroši okvir za municiju. :mrgreen:
Ovo se otprilike svodi na sledeći stav: "Svako vole da opljune, ali ja neću, jer ne volem da platim cenu opljuvavanja, a ko mene bude opljunuo, neka bere kožu na šiljak".
Što baš i nije neki super moralan stav, iako ova žena piše uglavnom imajući u vidu blogove, fejsbuk, tviter i slično. Malo samokontrole ne škodi, to je istina, a istina je i da "U jbt, ovaj Vidojković je sranje" nije na nivou nekog sistematski i jezički korektno :roll: odrađenog teksta u kome se elaborira kako i zašto je to tako. Ali: zašto ja na ovako nešto počnem da vijem barjak sa natpisom "Ghoule, vrati se, sve ti je oprošteno"?
Problem koji je za mene ovde vidljiv jeste što takav stav dovodi do teškog obezvređivanja kritike uopšte, i za to je srpska kritička scena lep (...tja...) primer. Rukovodeći se rezonovanjem sličnim kao u ove autorke, kritičari ne ujedaju ruku koja ih hrani već hvale i ono što im se ne hvali a kude samo stvari kojima je lovostaj iz nekog razloga istekao. Grupe se formiraju prema ličnim neprijateljstvima ili ideološkim vezama (a koliko se te dve stvari kod nas preklapaju suvišno je i govoriti). Jedan solidan broj kritičara se izveštio u tome da piše o knjizi na po dve-tri šlajfne a da na kraju ništa ne kaže određeno o tekstu.
Ne znam, možda je to vama okej, ali mene smara kad iz kritike mogu da iščitam za koga glasa pisac a za koga kritičar, a o kvalitetu knjige-kao-takve, niks. Ili hvalospevi, ili pozivi na linč, od kojih me jednako strava hvata jer prosto nakon njih ne poželim da uzmem knjigu u ruke.
Ali za sve to nije kriva ova kravica. Ona bi samo htela da se svi međusobno hvale, reklamiraju i pre svega kupuju. Što bi iko razmišljao o onome što čita.
Ja samo da izrispektujem Jevtropijevićku.
:oops:
bogami, da. rispekt, i to opaki, za Jevtropijevićku.
Sad su me pohvalili i Meho i Lidija... pa ljudi, ja mogu u penziju.
Rispekt i od mene.
Samo da primetim da takav stav može da bude nezgodan ako 'leba jedeš od pisanja, time plaćaš račune, 'raniš sitnu đecu..
Mda, još jednom smo saznali šta nećemo, a nikako da saznamo šta 'oćemo.
Quote from: Jevtropijevićka on 25-01-2011, 19:12:44
Rukovodeći se rezonovanjem sličnim kao u ove autorke, kritičari ne ujedaju ruku koja ih hrani već hvale i ono što im se ne hvali a kude samo stvari kojima je lovostaj iz nekog razloga istekao.
Nešić je u jednoj priči rekao nešto što se može podvesti pod ovu dilemu (mada bit rečenice u priči nema veze sa ovim):
"'...kao u svakoj vezi, podela uloga bila je odgovarajuća: ili jebete, ili bivate pojebani."Ili idi kuda te voda nosi, ili plivaj uzvodno. Treće opcije nema. Jednostavno, u ovoj državi teško je napraviti kritičara, jer se svi rukovode načelom
ruka ruku mije.
Quote from: angel011 on 25-01-2011, 19:23:25
Rispekt i od mene.
Samo da primetim da takav stav može da bude nezgodan ako 'leba jedeš od pisanja, time plaćaš račune, 'raniš sitnu đecu..
Naravno. To je praktična strana teorijskog problema :) koja se kod nas u praksi obično rešava udomljivanjem u jednu grupaciju i do-mile-volje-beskompromisnim pljuvanjem po drugoj.
Lako je meni da brljam po forumu pod nickom, istina; ali da budem iskrena, ima tu još nešto - ne bih ja ni pod tri nika i pet šifara odvojila od svog života vremena da napišem dvadeset strana o Vidojkoviću ili Ljiljani H.Đ. jer zbilja mislim da to ne zavređuju.
Ali kad budem videla neki takav tekst, nekako, neprincipijelno, priznajem da ću bar malo danuti dušom.
@Perin: nije teško napraviti kritičara, koliko ga je lako pokvariti. Kad prvi put treba pljunuti po drugaru... e, tu dođu gaće na rešeto.
Hm, ali da li neko ovde zaista živi od kritike? Ne, dakle od publikovanja teorijskih radova, nego od kritike (književnih) umetničkih dela? Nekako mi je to teško, skoro nemoguće da zamislim. Ako takvih ima, za razumeti je što se savijaju zakonu tržišta, mada svakako ne za pozdraviti. Ako ih nema onda pitanje integriteta ovde dobija na važnosti.
Tako da je problem verovatno čak više u tome da treba da se opljunu drugari, kako Jevtropijevićka ukazuje. Najbolje bi bilo da je tržište dovoljno veliko da to nikada ne moraš da radiš. Ali najčešće nije.
Pa, zapravo, ovde je više reč o tome da li pisac sme javno da opljune delo koje mu se ne sviđa, odnosno koje bi posledice toga bile. Recimo, opljuneš delo Laguninog autora zato što iskreno misliš da je u pitanju najobičnije smeće - smeš li to da uradiš, ako si i sam Lagunin autor? Ili ako se nadaš da ćeš jednog dana postati?
Quote from: angel011 on 25-01-2011, 19:44:29
Pa, zapravo, ovde je više reč o tome da li pisac sme javno da opljune delo koje mu se ne sviđa, odnosno koje bi posledice toga bile. Recimo, opljuneš delo Laguninog autora zato što iskreno misliš da je u pitanju najobičnije smeće - smeš li to da uradiš, ako si i sam Lagunin autor? Ili ako se nadaš da ćeš jednog dana postati?
Pazi da takvi kompromisi nisu svojstveni samo ovom esnafu ili branši; uvek i svuda ćeš relativno lakše da se probiješ ako si spreman na izvesne kompromise.
Ma, jasno.
U ovoj branši to nekad bude uočljivije, jer je javno, za razliku od kancelarijskih podmetanja.
Plus postoje oni koji pisce posmatraju kao umetničke duše, iznad takvih stvari. :lol:
Ovo je tumaranje po oblacima i iz toga se ništa neće roditi. Meho pita koliko kritičara živi od kritike, kao da neki pisci žive od pisanja. Jevtropijevićka piše da nije vredno truda, a volela bi da se neko drugi potrudi. Pih! Jedino Angel 001 malo darne.
Ako se ja ne varam, a lako je moguće da se ne varam, pitanje je bilo vezano za bilo čije (i plasirano bilo gde) mišljenje o knjigama. I to na Internetu (fejsbuku, tviteru, blogovima, forumima). Lamentiranje o zlehudoj sudbini domaće književne kritike možemo slobodno da ostavimo nekom drugom. Dakle, koliko koristi, a koliko štete se može naneti knjizi i piscu nakon čitanja neke knjige, ali i bez čitanja? Lako je za "tapšanje" to ukalkulišemo kad čitamo prikaze (gde, ko i za koga piše), ali kako se odrediti u suprotnom, mada se i to da ukalkulisati. Recimo, kad je u pitanju naša ZS radionica, imamo niz suprotstavljenih mišljenja i verovatno je da neki učesnici mogu da prođu kroz tu papazjaniju, ali šta se događa onima koji nemaju iskustva da prođu? Mislim da u tome ima više prostora za raspravu.
Quote from: angel011 on 25-01-2011, 19:59:49
Plus postoje oni koji pisce posmatraju kao umetničke duše, iznad takvih stvari. :lol:
... dok oni, generalno govoreći, retko kad imaju integriteta vrednog pomena. :lol:
(Meni je u svemu tome ipak bitan naglasak na posledicama, to jest obezvređenju.)
Ja ne kontam zašto bi se neko delo uopšte pljuvalo. Da se opljuje toliko da ga mora podmornica tražiti neće izmeniti činjenicu da je ono izdato i kao takvo egzistira. A ni da će se nekome svideti.
Nije mi se jednom desilo da zafrljacim knjigu nakon dvadesetak stranica preko sobe, besan zbog izgubljenog vremena i para. Ali mi ne bi na um palo da javno opljujem. Bez veze. Prijateljima kažem nešto tipa "Men' se nije dopalo." Sa naglaskom na "meni." To nikako ne znači da ne znam prepoznati loše pisanje.
Kad mi se svidi nešto, izuzetno svidi, pohvalim taj rad i to je to. Naravno, daleko od stručne kritike.
Druga je stvar po radionicama gde se ozbiljnom, objektivnom kritikom može uticati na stvaraoca.
Sad mi možete govoriti da sam nepopravljivo naivan, romantičar, 'vakav- 'nakav al' tako mislim.
@scallop:
Ako tako gledamo na stvari: maltene je nemoguće da pričanje ili pisanje o nekoj knjizi, ma koliko zlonamerno, njoj naškodi. Danas ozbiljna (znači finansijska) šteta može da se nanese, pre svega, sistematskim prećutkivanjem.
To što pisci, njihovi izdavači (često) i familija i prijatelji (uvek) to kanda ne kapiraju, druga je stvar.
A naravno, ali da ja sad ne pišem o tome, mogući su i dobri stari otkazi, zatvori, logori, ali za to prvo treba da kritiku napiše drug Ždanov.
Po meni to ide ovako:
Ako si osvešćeno biće onda si i svestan toga što si uradio/napisao i nijedna kritika te ne može niti vinuti u visine, niti pokopati u zemlju. Može da ti godi, ukoliko je pozitivna, sa aspekta, potvrđivanja svog suda o tome što si uradio ili da ti zasmeta ukoliko neko javno ukaže na mane za koje znaš (ili ne znaš) da postoje.
Na zapadu je to malkice drugačije, kako je to lepo Angel primetila, jer, tamo ljudi mogu da žive od pisanja i loša kritika (pravedna ili nepravedna, svejedno) može da te sahrani. Čini mi se da je kod nas malo opuštenija situacija.
Niko od nas ne živi od pisanja.
Sistematsko prećutkivanje je zanimljiv i prisutan mehanizam. Sa druge strane, ako se fatimo Ždanova mogli bismo i za Nerona.
Zato i nećemo.
(Eh, da mi je da sam Neron, na par dana makar...)
Kritika prijateljeve proze se može uporediti sa igranjem kladionice na tim za koji navijaš. Nepisano je pravilo da takvu stvar ne radiš; skoro uvek padneš na tiketu, zbog svojih preteranih subjektivnih utisaka, kompromisa i koječega ;)
Quote from: Jevtropijevićka on 25-01-2011, 20:26:59
Zato i nećemo.
(Eh, da mi je da sam Neron, na par dana makar...)
Zato je balkanski mentalitet muka živa. Svako bi da bude Neron par dana. To je bila prva stvar koju sam naučio na poslu. Svi moji radnici su imali neki svoj spisak kome će "nanu naninu" ako se zarati.
Dan kad Jevtropijevićka bude reprezentativna za balkanski mentalitet, taj će se Balkan naći na Olimpu.
Olimp je već na Balkanu. :o