Handling Criticism

by Katy White

Recently, the internet has been abuzz with the story of an author who chose to cyberstalk (then physically stalk) a reviewer whom she felt had been particularly harsh in her review. While I don't want to get into the details and, truthfully, wish I'd never heard about it in the first place, I've thought a lot about why this is resonating with the writing community so much and why I feel the way I feel about it. And in doing so, I've come to one conclusion:

I don't want to be universally loved. Not as an author. Not even as a person.

Sure, I wish I lived my life above reproach and offense (which I completely, unquestioningly do not), but even if I did that, people would still have a problem with me. The Savior lived His life perfectly. Yet look at how polarizing a figure He was and still is in our day! Even Christians view Him and His teachings differently. Heck, even Mormons do. Sometimes within our own families. All of life's beauty and heartache have agency at its center, and with agency comes different experiences and opinions.

I recently had my two best friends read my new WIP. One of them is a therapist and the other is a nurse. My therapist BFF gave me the feedback that one of the characters should be darker and consider suicide, as it was not only consistent with the character's mental illness, but it would also lead to an important revelation to my main character that would give her the growth she needed. And, in my perspective, her feedback was bang on. I made the change, and I think the story is stronger for it.

Yet my other best friend, the nurse, read the revised version and said that was the only part she had a problem with. Based on personal experiences, she has a problem reading about suicide and couldn't connect to the character as a result.

And you know what? I'm happy about that. I'm happy that she had a strong emotion about it, even if it wasn't the emotion I intended in writing the character or scenes. Because she's a human being reading her book through the lenses of her own personal experience, not mine.

Think of it this way: if everyone who reads my book responds exactly the way I want them to, that obviously means the world has been taken over by automatons who have all been created in my image.

Holy shnikes, is that ever a terrifying thought.

So the next time you write something, remember to actively hope that people react differently to it. Because otherwise, you're in a weird Doctor Who version of reality that's probably going to end with you being harvested by your own automatons for spare organs.

Or something.

You Will Be Misunderstood

I had always heard that authors have problems with hate mail, grumpy fans, people who just don’t “get it.” But for a long time I thought maybe this was only an occurrence for some authors or for some books. I was rather naïve. The fact is that no matter what you write, someone out there (if you have a big enough audience) will think it’s terrible. Someone will think it’s trash. Someone will be very vocal about it.

Be prepared.

I first experienced this myself when I wrote a short story that I thought was merely humorous and silly. When a few strangers read it, I discovered that what I thought was fun and light-hearted they perceived to be selfish and cruel. It was utterly surprising to me, but I could see how they interpreted it that way. It made me realize I would either have to be much more careful about what I wrote or just not care if it was misinterpreted.

At least, that’s what I thought at first. Recently, however, I have decided to amend my opinion. It is impossible to write carefully enough that no one will misunderstand you. Recently a lovely, very G-rated book by a fantastic author was reviewed on Amazon as being “soft porn” and “highly inappropriate.” We’re talking about a book that had, I think, a quick peck on the cheek. That’s it. Now, I have no way of knowing why the reviewer felt this way about the book. Was she particularly sensitive to any sort of physical contact? Does she have just absolutely no tolerance for any sort of romance in a book at all? Was she confusing this title with another book? I don’t know. But the fact is that the review exists.

You will be misunderstood. No matter what.

I’m sorry to say that I have, at times, been on the giving end of this phenomenon. I have read books that I thought were dreadful, and I kind of blasted them. I don’t do this anymore, unless the author is very very dead (I’m fairly sure Shakespeare really doesn’t care what I thought of Romeo and Juliet). Authors don’t need it or deserve it, and if you’re trying to warn your friends away from a book, you can do it gently.

And if you’re on the receiving end, if you felt that you wrote something meaningful or lovely or good or just fun, ignore the reviews that tell you that what you wrote isn’t good enough. It’s yours and it is.

No Accounting for Taste, or Why Goodreads Is Lame

by Katy White

I recently went on a Goodreads kick and looked up famous books and their ratings, as well as books I like and dislike.  I was stunned by what I found.  Horrified for the state of humanity, honestly.  Because guess what I discovered:

The Diary of a Young Girl by Anne Frank was rated lower than EVERY SINGLE CASSANDRA CLARE novel.  Yes, you read that correctly.  Humanity (of the Goodreads variety) has decided that The Infernal Devices series--which is not only completely derivative of The Mortal Instruments but is also glorified fan fiction of the author's own fan fiction--is better than the candid, unfiltered, unedited diary of a girl hiding in Nazi occupied Amsterdam, a diary that shows us the unquenchable power of the human spirit.  A diary that illustrates that, even in the most dramatic and evil of situations, hope reigns supreme and a girl can actually still fuss about kissing boys and fighting with her sister and not getting along with her mom. A diary that displays growth and maturity and a skill for writing that's far beyond Anne Frank's years, while still allowing for mood swings and a youthful woe-is-me attitude that you'd be hard-pressed not to find in a teenager, let alone one hiding from the Nazis who ultimately killed her.  Add to all of this the fact that she was keeping a diary, not writing a novel to be consumed and criticized by the public...

Right.  Clockwork Angel is totally better than that.

*Takes deep breath*

This isn't about Cassandra Clare or her books, of course, because they're fun (at least the first series) and exciting and have lots of kissing and teen angst and magical powers, which is always a good ride.  It's not even about how important I think Anne Frank's diary is in exposing teens (among others) to the darkest aspects of history and mankind in an...approachable way.

It's about the fact that people have the right to their own opinions and voices, even if their voices suck (to us).  As writers offering our works to the public for criticism, we must remember one cardinal rule:

We're going to write some beautiful things, dang it. Lovely, powerful, striking words that will put tears in people's eyes and tug on their hearts and make them feel all the feels.  These words will appeal to some and not to others, which is fine.  People don't have to love what we love to be smart or well-read, even if that means an intense dislike of a classic book or author (though a general disdain of the classics makes me question someone's taste entirely). But we call it "taste" for a reason. Everyone's wired to like different things. I'm wired to like sriracha and salt and vinegar chips, and you hating those things isn't a threat to my love.  The same should be true of our preferences in books.  Nothing is universally loved.

But that isn't the problem, either.  The problem is the professional haters of the world who think it's their job to poop in every sundae because someone said she liked chocolate.  We could write the greatest, most poignant novel of the modern era, and some naysayer's gonna naysay, like so:

The Diary of a Young Girl, Anne Frank

Recommends it for: people who like depressing or boring books

This book was awful! I hated it and thats all i have to say about it.

Well played, CullenFan172.  Well played.  

So when we all get to the stage of having books up on Goodreads, may we allow the following reviews to remind us that people revel in creating controversy the way I revel in a two pound bag of Mini Eggs.  Or, at the very least, let the measured, thoughtful reviews below remind us that Goodreads can be super lame:

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, J.K. Rowling
Pathetic. Really pathetic.  Don't even get me started on the plot. Epic failure.
This is the great literature of our age? What hope is there for any decent writers if all kids want to read is this utter garbage? What hope is there for the world if kids are growing up thinking this is good literature?

It made me consider both suicide and mass homicide

Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen
This book is quite possibly the most insipid novel I have ever read in my life. 

Macbeth, William Shakespeare 
Possibly the greatest disappointment I’ve had in my entire reading life.

East of Eden, John Steinbeck
I hate this book. Hate. Ponderous, pretentious, melodramatic, self-satisfied, patronizing to its readers, with ultimately nothing to say.

The Tell-Tale Heart, Edgar Allen Poe
This story was disturbing. Ummmm yeah that about sums it up.  (Katy's snarky aside: So, you gave the story one star for perfectly accomplishing what it set out to do? Goooood.)

The Road, Cormac McCarthy
This is perhaps the worst story I have ever read.  The Road is personally the first really pointless book I've read.  

Jane Eyre, Charlotte Brontë 
If you like fantastically depressing subject matter that would make Dickens cry (think orphans, typhoid-infested boarding schools, and crazy people locked in attics) and an annoying protagonist who can't decided if she's independent or submissive, you'd probably like this book. 

The Book Thief, Markus Zusak
This is such a piece of steaming dog **** that I'd recommend it only to people I REALLY hate.

The Alchemist, Paulo Coelho
Utter drivel. The book was badly written, righteous, condescending, preachy, and worst of all, the ending was morally questionable.

The Fault in Our Stars, John Green
Predictable. Boring. Uninspiring. Put me to sleep. 


Nice, right?  

When we reach the stage of having our labors of love lambasted on Goodreads, remember the words of Brendan Behan: 

"There is no such thing as bad publicity except for your own obituary."

What do you think? Does Goodreads scare you? Are you excited by the prospect of having someone care enough to hate your book? How do you handle bad reviews?