.png)
Page Chewing
Looking for a place to discuss your favorite books and hear more about the book industry? We're here to help. When we're not reading a book together and discussing each week with friends, we're having casual, fun and informative conversations with other readers, authors, and content creators in the book sphere.
While we mostly read fantasy books, we venture out into other genres often. Love comic books? Our Panel Chewing series has you covered! Mike, Jarrod and Steve discuss their favorite weekly books on the Pick of the Week and discuss other series with their own dedicated episodes.
On the Friday Conversation we often invite guests to discuss certain topics or meet with a group of friends from the Page Chewing forums to have a talk about anything type of discussion. We invite you to start your weekend the right way with us. So grab a drink, relax and unwind with us.
Page Chewing
Friday Conversation Ep 100 (Part 2/3) Deconstructing Book Reviews: Bias, Genre, and the Complexities of the Reader-Author Dynamic
Ever wrestled with the idea that your favorite book might not be someone else's cup of tea? We're tearing apart the layers of bias and genuine critique in book reviews, especially when genres like Young Adult or grimdark fiction enter the fray. Join us for a candid discussion where we promise to leave no page unturned in the quest to understand the responsibilities of reviewers and the impact of personal taste on literature's reception.
Navigating the digital landscape of author-reader relationships has never been more complex, and we're taking you on a journey through the blurred lines of social media and the 'death of the author' in modern discourse. What happens to a writer's work when the floodgates of public opinion swing wide open? We're sharing the emotional roller-coaster authors experience with each review and the pressures of maintaining an online presence, all while fostering a more respectful and accessible dialogue. Through tales of review bombing and the quest for authenticity online, discover how the dynamics of social media have transformed the literary community.
Our expedition through the realms of literature doesn't stop at genre debates or the virtual world—it extends into the personal reading journeys that shape us. We're resolving to slow down and savor the stories we love, with a nod to the enriching experience of revisiting old favorites, and the mental refresh that non-fiction offers between intense fictional escapades. And for our fellow sci-fi and gaming enthusiasts, we're setting the stage for future explorations at the intersection of narrative and interactive media. So pour yourself a cup of your preferred brew and settle in for a conversation that celebrates the diverse world of books and the readers who journey through them.
JCM Berne: https://jcmberne.com/
Susana Imaginario: https://susanaimaginario.com/index.html
Jose's Amazing Worlds: https://www.youtube.com/@JosesAmazingWorlds
Film Chewing Podcast: https://www.buzzsprout.com/2235582/follow
Lens Chewing on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@lenschewing
Speculative Speculations: https://creators.spotify.com/pod/show/speculative-speculations
Support the podcast: https://www.paypal.com/ncp/payment/7EQ7XWFUP6K9E
Join Riverside.fm: https://riverside.fm/?via=steve-l
But the part, or I guess, hour four, part two, or wait what hour three? Sorry, part two. So we will continue. But Joe is making a comment earlier that I wanted to get Jared and person is opinion on, which is if someone like, let's see, if someone doesn't like YA and they don't like YA and they read a YA book for them, to one star book they go and knowing they're not going to go into enjoy, is that something that should be? Is that something you should do, knowing you don't enjoy a certain genre?
Speaker 2:I don't. I don't think that's a good idea to read something that you know you're not going to like, you know? I mean I guess there are exceptions and every, every situation as far as that goes, but YA, as it's defined these days, I personally wouldn't be interested in reading. But you know it's. Somebody could change my mind if there's a certain, you know the certain traits to it that might appeal to me. But why, yeah, why would you read something that you you're automatically go in with a negative connotation, that I don't know why you would do that without some other ulterior motive behind it.
Speaker 4:I mean, what I was saying was more like like, if you want to read a YA, like I read a YA book recently because it's written by someone I know, I know so like I wanted to support them, so I bought the book and I read it. My point was more like if you know you don't like a certain genre, but the book is perfectly, seems like a perfectly good representative of that genre, but that just doesn't appeal to you, you shouldn't give a rating based on your experience.
Speaker 4:You should give a rating either not give a rating, or give a rating based on how that book meets the expectations of its genre.
Speaker 2:Does the book do?
Speaker 4:what it's trying to do. If the book is a good YA book and you, there's whiny teenagers complaining about their romances and it's just annoying to you, which it would be to me I shouldn't be one starring that book because that's a perfectly good. Yeah, it's also bad. I can also be bad for what it is. That's a conversation, but if it's right.
Speaker 2:I also think that there's there's a this whole the labeling of YA is. It's such a broad general statement because, like Neil Gaiman writes YA sometimes, or at least stories that can appeal to younger people, but he writes them so elegantly and he writes them so well. You know why can't that? You know, type of that type of pros go into other stuff?
Speaker 2:I think the cops are coming for Jose, remember they found a bike, but you know, so you can still write at a, at a, you know it, really good pros at a. Ya for young, for younger readers, you know it. So you know it. It's so I guess I have read YA, if you consider some of Neil Gaiman stuff YA like Coraline and what have you. But as far as some of the other YA I have seen, briefly, it does sound. It does seem like they're writing down to the kids that it's meant for and I don't, I don't like that, but normally I wouldn't read it ways a bad example, but it's.
Speaker 6:It's good. But, like personally I, I hate YA, but I have I had read and enjoy several YA books. When they are well written it, it doesn't matter if they are away. But there's a lot of of this, you know, excuse, oh, you don't like it because is way. No, I don't like it because it's bad.
Speaker 6:And there's this idea that YA is necessarily bad or it has to have these tropes and it's why it's perceived as bad. No, and there's a lot of people writing, right, that's really, they don't know how to write and it's just, it's bad, it's unpolished, it's had, makes no sense, but it's okay because it's YA, you know, and if you don't like it, you just don't like YA, that's, that's, that's true. Yeah, there's nothing wrong with YA. It can be done well. But the fact is, in my experience, the vast majority are just very badly written because some of they don't even respect the audience. I don't know how I would read that, but yeah, that's why I see it.
Speaker 6:Another pet peeve is grim dark. Oh, my book is grim dark. Oh, really, I love grim dark and I go and read and sorry that this is not grim dark and it's very, very rare these days to find an actual grim dark book, but you know there's thousands being marketed as grim dark and and those will get the two stars, man, because if I go into a book that you telling me it's grim dark and then it's torture porn or just you know there's a few monsters here and there what makes a book grim dark to you?
Speaker 4:what attributes about a book make it legitimately grim dark in your eyes?
Speaker 6:nihilism, a fair dose of cynicism. Morally great characters, but there are also well rounded characters, not just, you know, being evil for the sake of being evil and because everything is evil in that world, so they're just gonna be mean. Just it has to have death. It has to have some sort of philosophy and message behind it. Not just we're just gonna fight each other because that's what we do in this world and everyone is bad. There's, there's so much that is. It's just just work. For me it's just, it's just empty form for shock value characters. Just cardboard villains.
Speaker 5:Same torture scene after the torture scene, same tropes, same yeah, no that doesn't work for me as the, as the Bard would, he said he wrote in his play, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing yeah, exactly perfect what, but what is like?
Speaker 6:what is an example of good, grim, dark well, okay, it's the obvious example, but first law actually best surf cold. I think it's a best example than the actual, at least the first book. Pretty much a lot of the 40k stuff, especially what is written by then, have not okay that's pretty good, yeah, and it is slim.
Speaker 6:There's, there's, there's a lot of green books and a lot of dark books and lots of stories with grim dark moments, and still it's the dream not just became this gimmick marketing tool that, oh, I'm so cool for me. Just yeah, don't care. These days I would rather bet on the, on the YA book than the grim dark, because I at least. I think there's a better chance of actually getting a YA book and if it's well written, it's, it's fun.
Speaker 5:I was also gonna say that, just to add to what you were saying, susanna. I had the similar experience and, but with the caveat that I'm not as diversely read in grim dark, because there are some books where I read the pitch and I'm just like I don't want to go through this but off what I have read, that I haven't read warhammer, but the two examples that I gave before you came online, that there are just two that I read which are truly grim dark for me, and my definition of grim dark would be pretty similar to yours. One is first law and the second one is prince of nothing.
Speaker 6:That's it and I really need to get into gear and read that or you can read dark.
Speaker 5:The audio is not bad. Oh, you didn't like the audio. The audio is not bad. The audio book for the darkness that comes before it's not bad. It suits the narration, it suits the tone of the world. It's very slightly grandiose. It's like martin shaw's similar simmerillion. At first I was struggling, struggling, struggling. Then I got used to it and I was like, yeah, it's fine yeah, it might be on to.
Speaker 6:I might try it again. I find it easier to adapt to audio books, then push through reading the book.
Speaker 5:It might just work for you, I'm not sure.
Speaker 3:Okay, but bring it back to Joe's point about giving a one-star review. I think if I buy a book and I read the book and I don't like it, I'm perfectly entitled to give a one-star review, because these are my reasons. Why and why would I read a book that I know I'm not gonna like? Well, so I'm pretty prejudiced towards the whole romance genre. But after you know, a couple of months ago, when Johnny words gave us the romance challenge, I picked up one of the books and I'm ashamed to say that I did enjoy it when it was good fun, and I'll probably pick up another one from the list this year. So, even though generally I don't look for romance in my books and I read, you know, maybe one a year that's why we pick them up to my willingness to be surprised and find something different. And if I don't like it, I'll give it like a zero stars if I have to, because I'm perfectly entitled, it's my opinion. I pay for the book, that's it.
Speaker 4:I can't stop you, but I think that if you read let's say you read the romance novel and you were a slightly different reader and you said you know what I could tell, these two would end up together halfway through the book and that just ruined it for me and one star that was your reasoning, and their readers, for whom that would be their experience.
Speaker 4:But that is not only typical but required of the romance genre. That is how they have to work. They literally you cannot write a romance novel where they don't end up together like that's. That is part of the genre. So someone, if someone, had read that and thought this book is terrible because I could tell halfway through, they'd end up together and look, it turns out I was right and they one-star it. That's not doing a service to other readers, because other readers picking up a romance book don't want to say how good you know, does this? They want they want to know is this a good romance book? They don't want to know is this a good book? To someone who really fundamentally dislikes what is required of the romance genre, I mean, I can't stop you right, like I'm not. I'm not in charge of anything, not even like my own household.
Speaker 3:So I, like you know, like let's, I'm not in charge, let me reverse the question then when you we, I like justified on giving a one-star review? Yeah, I think I've got an idea about that, but when we'll be entitled to say this is a bad book was?
Speaker 4:bad at what it tried to do. So if you read a little art in G and it's poorly written and it's like repetitive and it's like stuff that's you've seen before and it's like the characters are flat and an interesting, one-star. But if you give it a one-star because there are stat blocks at the end of the chapters and that annoys you, because you don't want to read a book where you feel like you're playing a video game, you're in the wrong. I write superhero novels. If you're like it's so dumb that someone with these magical powers would fly around with a cape, and you one-star my book. For that reason you shouldn't have read my book because it says superheroes on the front cover well, no, it doesn't. But the blur, okay, right.
Speaker 4:So but if you do one-star because the characters are flat and an interesting, or because the senses are boring, or because the story doesn't like make sense internally, fine. Or if you, if you one-star my book because you read and you're like this isn't realistic, like they have artificial gravity generators and magical powers. The real world doesn't have that. That's just stupid. I hate books that do that. I'm one-starring it. Then the reviewer is wrong because I'm writing a book about magical superheroes that's in the blur. If you hate that and you don't like that part of it, when I set up front, that's what the story is about. You are wrong to one-star for that reason. If you one-star because the characters are an interesting or because the interactions don't make sense, because it's not internally consistent, that's all fine. But if you one-star because the genre is something that you're not in and I don't people who don't like fantasy, right, because he just flies and I'm like that's totally legitimate, that like bothers you, that's fine. But don't like sleep because he flies right like that's, that's, that's his thing, right.
Speaker 3:I've got two issues with that point of view, and one would be that in order for me or anyone to write a book, you are requiring them. You're requiring them to have some level of knowledge or whatever genre they are reading, whether it's romance or fantasy or whatever genre it is for me to say that this book or bad like. I need to know the genre and therefore interpret what the writer was trying to achieve and maybe have a knowledge that I haven't got, which I suppose is a bad point. Don't talk about stuff you don't know anything about. So I can get on board with that. But equally, we read for pleasure and opinions are subjective and tastes and what people like and dislike is is very subjective, and here I go with my will of time bashing. I think it's a big pile of thinking, elephant dung, but some people love it. So it's purely subjective and I think I've really not fantasy to say it's a fissure shit. So you know it's. We enter into the subjective and therefore it is subjective.
Speaker 5:I think it's entirely subjective and I mean, I think that anybody should be able to read whatever they want. If they can provide it, they have access to the book. It is a form of literary gatekeeping, no better than what literary fiction readers do to genre fiction readers when they say, oh, we don't read fantasy because fantasy. If in fantasy we do this thing, oh, but you shouldn't read this book. It's just the same literary gatekeeping. And what are we achieving out of this? I don't think we are achieving anything out of this.
Speaker 5:I'm very sure that most readers, when they look at a one-star review and for, let's say, a lit rpg, and they say that the lit rpg is a one-star because I saw, you know, leveling, leveling up in the story, the people who are experienced lit rpg readers know that, okay, that's not a deal breaker.
Speaker 5:And the people who are new lit rpg readers, who are looking at the book, will read that and go like, yeah, that's either that's appealing to me, not a deal breaker, or, oh, my god, that is a deal breaker and they won't pick up the book.
Speaker 5:So it I don't think that a particular review can have any such influence on others, so much that you know that we need to be so cognizant, especially, as Jose said, most of us are reading for leisure or just plain enjoyment, and I mean that's what I said a little while ago, jose, is that I mean I read books for my own enjoyment, I log them for my own enjoyment. I not for my own enjoyment, sorry for my OCDN satisfaction, and I rate them for my own satisfaction. I don't consider it as any kind of service to anybody or any kind of obligation to other readers. I mean I don't tell anybody to look at my reviews or anything. If they do, if there are like-minded people, if there are people who are my friends and who love some books which I hate it, and they ask me, of course I will clarify You're a number on Goodreads.
Speaker 4:You're bringing up or down that person's average, whether you might not want that to happen. Same thing on Amazon. You give my book for you.
Speaker 5:Yeah, but I mean, that's part of like. This is the part like which I'm saying that an author creates the work and puts it out and once it's out it belongs to readers. It does not belong to the author anymore.
Speaker 4:And I can't stop you from reading my book and one starring it because it's got guys in tights and capes, right, I can't. But I'm saying you're doing a disservice to other readers if you read it and that was the reason for your rating, if you rated it low or lowly for that reason, you would actually be doing a disservice to other readers because they would be passing out my book. So I'm oh, it's got a one star which could severely impact. It's not an impact me. I've got 300 ratings. I'm close to sending, but a year ago I had 50, right, then a one star would have made an impact then and I think that's doing a disservice and also.
Speaker 4:I just want to make very clear. I'm not saying anything about who should be reading books, right? So, like you read, please read anything. I'm not trying to gatekeep who reads stuff. I just want to. I do want it. I would like to be able to get. I can't, I don't have the power to. I'd like to gatekeep who reads books. I wish there was a way to do that, and I don't have it. I don't have that authority. I'm not pretending I did, but I wish we had a culture was different, where people rated books with a little more care in this specific way.
Speaker 4:But again, I'm not forcing anybody like you, rate whatever you want, right, I'm not. I'm not. I'm on charge.
Speaker 5:If you say this for an indie book, I get where you're coming from. But I mean the same logic applies to Charles Dickens' great expectations. People rate it a one star because it doesn't match match their gender conforming expectations of the 21st century and of course they are not taking into account when the book was written and what. But it's an entirely valid reading experience. I mean, I love great expectations and I disagree with the that readers decision to rate it one star on that account, but that does not mean that they're wrong. It's just a different perspective.
Speaker 4:I mean I just don't think we should say that this is wrong and this is right because it's too subjective to if you can say, if you can say the review is is is okay, then you're not and you're not going to let me say it's right or wrong, then you can also have to acknowledge that my ability to say your review is right or wrong is equally subjective and allowed. I'm reviewing reviews. I'm saying certain reviews are bad and certain reviews are good and you have to respect that by your own logic.
Speaker 3:Yeah, absolutely. And you can say this review was good, because I don't know it was it was a well-thought-out, you know, argued review criticism, or this one was a very purely emotional based response to the book and you know you, I think both, both things are compatible Absolutely.
Speaker 4:I mean, I've had I've had negative reviews of my books that I thought were very good. There you go, and my definition of very good review and a bad review is if a review would help new readers like decide whether or not this was the book for them. So someone wrote it in my second book like two stars too much politics and they went into some specifics and I'm like that's an excellent review.
Speaker 4:It's a negative review, but it was super well done, because people who would be upset by these elements of my book would read that and go. I don't want to read that and they'd be right not to. It was perfect, I think it was a negative review.
Speaker 6:It said the book wasn't good, but it was an excellent review.
Speaker 4:So, yeah, I'm going to have a stance on reviews. I will review the reviews Fair warning.
Speaker 1:Well, I guess the flip side is bad reviews sell books too, right? So if there's a bad review, that's like I hate this book. There's politics in it. Someone else may be like hey, I like politics in my books.
Speaker 4:I'm going to satirizing like a certain wing of American politics in this book. I'll pick that up. Maybe it told me some books I don't know.
Speaker 1:So yeah, I mean because there's lots of time, like I think I buy more books from negative reviews rather than positives, because a lot of the positive reviews aren't very critical and they're just like I love this book, greatest book ever, but the negative ratings.
Speaker 4:with that, reviews are worse and that also bothers me because someone just gives a one star with no text. That doesn't really help anybody.
Speaker 6:Yeah, that is. Those are. Those are the worst. You know, the despiteful one stars I got a few. Usually they show up whenever I used to be a bit more free with my opinions online and or just know. Two of them specifically showed up very shortly after I said I didn't like certain book by another in the author and they just, they just pop up there so I stopped talking about other in the authors.
Speaker 6:Yeah, the despiteful one star, because if it comes attached with the, with the comment, whatever it is, it's either going to reflect that the reviewer you know is personally attacking you, like I have one that says this book is awful in every way, don't buy it. You know that's not a review, that's a personal attack, but at least it's there. People can see that you know that person was being deliberately harmful. Or if it says all this book is too confusing, there's too many gods, you know someone might go and say, oh, that's that's great, the more the merrier you know might have. But if it's just the one star, that's that's deliberately cruel, that's just to bring your rating down, just to harm you. And yeah, they only do it if it's personal.
Speaker 6:I noticed that people that just don't go, you know, maybe someone with nothing better to do, but if you, if you don't like the book that much, you either you don't start reading it or you DNF it and you give two stars for the trouble. The audio explain why. If it's just the one star, it's personal, it's directed at the author. There's nothing we can do about it.
Speaker 2:Cool. I don't go on good reviews or Amazon, so I'm all set.
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 6:Yeah. I think an exception in this parameter in melez, and I understand your one stars and I understand your rating, but I also know you wouldn't like you explain, you wouldn't do that to a small author and and I know melez and it's, it's like she says we love time. You know, I think everyone has their, I mean I want to start a book today which was just.
Speaker 5:I mean, I actually wrote well, I didn't write it in the final review, but we have status updates over there. I actually wrote like why are like the books like this are published? Why I lose faith in humanity.
Speaker 1:Wow.
Speaker 5:It was just like what the hell was this book and why? Why? Why? I mean I went from the first page to the last page just being like why, why? Sometimes it's a very real reaction. I would never put it in the final review, but it does happen. It's a very popular book, so it's not like it's again, as you said, it's not something that matters either way. But oh my God, and then I mean, everybody who saw it was like why. Somebody told me recommended this book to me. They were like there's a very good film. You should read this book. Very good. I mean, you might like it because you like weird, weird fiction. And then, my God, and then one person who reads horror was like follow me. The next time you pick up something like this, you're going to ask me. I was like I promise, do you want to know the name of the book? Sure Crash by DG Ballard.
Speaker 6:Oh, and that was on the list. I read one book of that list. It's unbelievable, your two star list that you are.
Speaker 2:It's in there isn't it. Yeah, I saved it.
Speaker 6:I saved it just.
Speaker 5:I have some friends who tell me like if Farumita one star is a book I'm going to go Guaranteed new favorite for me. So I'm like very happy to have.
Speaker 1:Yeah, bad reviews, saw books too.
Speaker 5:It happened to me like to a few days, few weeks back or maybe one week back. I was reading this book and I DNF'd it. I can't remember Maybe third in or 40% in or no, I think it was a third in. So that was this person who was not interested in this book at all. And then I was, like you know, I went into rant mode. I was like what the hell is this? Neither did it have rhyme nor did it have reason. And then he was like now I'm adding this to my TBR. It's like what is like a book which is this hated by, you must be read.
Speaker 6:That is a point too. If you're hating and you're still reading it and the yeah, I agree.
Speaker 5:I mean I totally agree, Like Savannah I this. I truly feel that you know the books with illicit thumb reaction, whether extreme negative or extreme positive, or at least positive or negative, at least they are memorable. The worst books are the ones which bore me, where I'm like, eh, it's a three star. Yeah, I read it, it's a thing I did buy. And two months later, if you ask me what was this book about? I'll be like, yeah, I need to see this.
Speaker 6:I think there's probably more than one, but I'll have to check. I think I only have one book that I rated one star, and it wasn't to attack the author, but it was because I really, really hated it. So, again, it wasn't an objective analysis of the book, but I really, really hated it, and that's why you know it has the one star I think it's the only one, I think even the great caps. It got two stars when the book.
Speaker 5:Oh, I liked it so much. Oh, sorry, not me. I was not me. I was not me. I was the one that was born. So yeah, the two stars are the ones that bore me.
Speaker 6:I only have one that I hated, because if I don't like it I just stop it and then I don't rate. But at the most rate two stars if it's a day.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I read a lot of classic literature and I was high hopes. I had high hopes going into the great Gatsby and it just didn't work for me. I mean, the guy is very good, he's a very good prose writer, you can write stuff and it was put together well, but I just could not find it in me to get into that book. I found it so boring and I was like, wow, what's going on here? This is a classic literature book, exactly. Yeah, because I read great expectations. I love great expectations.
Speaker 5:I love my favorite Dickens. I love you know.
Speaker 2:I have quite a few of them down there but that I love, and that one and Moby Dick bore me to tears.
Speaker 5:Oh my God, I was very happy by the ending, were you?
Speaker 2:happy by the ending. I love the beginning. I love the first two or three chapters.
Speaker 5:I celebrated the ending. I love the ending.
Speaker 2:I like actually like the ending, the last two or three chapters, but everything between it took me months to get through it, months and months.
Speaker 5:I was shamed by my mom for not liking that book.
Speaker 6:I didn't like it twice, but I'm not sure if I'm going to pick it up again.
Speaker 5:Also, zana, you can be shamed by my mom too. I was shamed by my mom for not liking that book. She's like Moby Dick. You didn't like it. I was like unbearable, just unbearable. I'm losing the will to live as I read this.
Speaker 6:So the one-star book was the Wasp Factory. I love that book. I'm not touching that.
Speaker 5:Ian Banks right.
Speaker 2:I'm not touching that book Jose loved it, of course he too.
Speaker 6:Brilliant.
Speaker 3:It's absolutely brilliant.
Speaker 5:But, jose, would you recommend it to me?
Speaker 3:No, Well for me. Maybe I would, if just to get a reaction out of you, and I think your reaction wouldn't disappoint, but that's the only reason why we recommend it. In the same way, I recommend that you read Lost Girls by Alan Moore.
Speaker 5:Oh boy, exactly.
Speaker 1:One thing that I'm not sure that I agree with is the whole reviewers' reviews belong to reviewers? I'm not sure that's. I mean, I don't know. I guess reviewers should have space to express their opinions and feel like they can and not become a back and forth. But at the same time, I mean I don't know.
Speaker 1:I mean, if an author comments on a negative review with thanks for reading or thanks for giving it a try, and someone might be offended by that, just a sincere comment like hey, thanks for trying it anyway, you can turn it into a whole thing where you know we're the author's like overstepping their bounds, even if it's a sincerely hey, thanks for trying it, even if you didn't like it, it can come off as sarcastic or like being an asshole, because it's hard to get context when you're reading, you know, in text on Goodreads or something. So I think there's, there should be a little bit of play. Of course you should never go after someone for saying, well, you're just an idiot, that's why I don't like my book. I mean, that's something different. But if you say hey, like thanks for reading it, or sorry, I didn't work for you, or whatever, I mean, I don't know, I think there should be a little bit of back and forth.
Speaker 5:So permission to share my perspective as purely a reader, not a writer and not even a reviewer. So, steve, like how I think about this is I gave Middlemarch Two Stars by George Eliot. She's dead. She has a huge fandom, she's beloved by many people. George Eliot or her readers are not going to come after me and comment on my review saying, or my rating, saying she's dead. I mean, unless we have a Sian system where authors are descending from wherever they are to comment on Goodreads review, it's not going to happen. Never.
Speaker 5:True novel by Mina Mizumura Mizumura, a 900 page Japanese World War II-ish setting Retelling of Wuthering High, which is a very, very. I like Wuthering Heights a lot, but anyway, I was thoroughly bored and thoroughly disappointed by this novel. I gave it two stars. Minayam Azumara is a very, fairly well-known author, fairly well-translated author. Her book is very critically acclaimed. Nobody's going to come after, neither the readers who love the book, nor her, nor her publisher, nor her agent. Nobody's going to come and comment on my review saying you didn't get it. So why, when I do the same thing for any author who does see the review, would they come into that space and say anything about it?
Speaker 2:One is dead one is too famous and one is.
Speaker 4:Why not? If you're allowed to comment on a book, why can't some other person, whether or reader or the author themselves, comment on your review?
Speaker 5:A reader, of course, can comment.
Speaker 4:And expressing your opinion, you're okay, and expressing our feelings about things is okay in this public space. Why are you privileged that the author can't respond? I'm not going to answer your reviews, I don't do that, but I'm just saying by your own argument, shouldn't it be fine?
Speaker 5:No, it isn't. Because an author is a creator Once their creation is out, they cannot comment on that creation.
Speaker 4:Their communication with their reader is through their art.
Speaker 5:Otherwise they are transcending that barrier of communicating through art into communicating through other means. An artist and the consumer of the art communicate through the piece of art itself and the piece of art alone. That is the primary method of communication. If, beyond that, I attend signings, I attend reading, I attend live events by the author, I attend booktube discussions, that is separate but primary mode of communication between any artist, any form of art and any consumer of art is the work itself. That is the basis of separation of art and the artist.
Speaker 4:You are aware that was not historically the case. In the 1900s. People would review books. Authors would respond to the reviews publicly in newspapers and letters that were published that were widely available. Back and forth, back and forth. This was a normal thing, that always happened. When do you think that should have changed? You are saying this now. The rules are different than they used to be. I am like, well, okay, if you are deciding there are new rules, what is your grounding for that? That was never true before.
Speaker 6:That question. So okay, authors can't reply. But how do you feel if an author likes your review on Goodreads, being it good or bad, just clicks a lot.
Speaker 5:I wouldn't notice it unless I get a notification. Yeah, it's fine. I am not even saying the author can't reply. Of course the author can reply. The author can do whatever they want. I am saying in my mind it breaches something of that sacred barrier of communication being only through the art when the author uses the Goodreads text box or the common box to say, hey, here's something, whatever you want to say, put it in the book, put it on your communication or your thing. That's just my perspective. I know lots of people who enjoy interacting with authors and I do too. Honestly, you are tying it to me, not regarding the work.
Speaker 4:I can't respond except through a book. I can't make a YouTube video and respond. I can't tweet it. I am hurt, I feel very. I am being put in a little box by your standards.
Speaker 5:This is the thing. It's a matter of scale. If you think about the authors, the authors couldn't be bothered. Let's say Stephen King he is not going to do this about his book. Neil Gaiman is not going to do this about his book. Come down a little bit lower. Jessica Townsend with the number more series she is not going to do this about her book. Sarah J Maas is not going to do this about her book. I don't think it's a trend in literary fiction as of now to do this. All the book price shortlist does. Some of them have like 100 ratings on Goodreads. When I saw the long list become the shortlist, None of them have interacted. Some of them are not even on social media. It's a very specific phenomenon to a particular section. People are saying and of course publishers are pushing also Be on Instagram, be on Twitter, be on this, be on that. I am not blaming any author or anything. He is a scale issue.
Speaker 4:Sanison can't read all his Goodreads reviews. There isn't enough time in the month for him to do that.
Speaker 5:He has a 4.75 average.
Speaker 4:I can read every review on Goodreads of my books. It's not that many. That's a scale difference. People like Sanison and King I don't know about them specifically, People in that league often do respond to critical comments. In general, they will respond to whatever the New York Times book reviewer might say. They might be interviewed and say I will answer some of this stuff. That has always happened. I think it's not responding to individual Goodreads' ratings. Who the heck would have time when you have 10,000 reviews?
Speaker 5:You can't read them.
Speaker 4:I think it's based on scale.
Speaker 5:It's a question of power differential. New York Times first journalist can, even if Sanison or whoever replies can reply back. If it's just a civilian who has an account, what are they going to do? Let's say Sanison pulls them out.
Speaker 4:Say, hypothetically, you reviewed one of my books in a negative or whatever Negative or positive. I responded you think there's a power differential between us?
Speaker 5:Yes, there is, apart from the.
Speaker 4:Flattered and upset. No, I'm so excited Someone thinks I have power. I wish you could see my household, meet my kids or my wife.
Speaker 5:I never as I said, like 75% to 80% of the authors I read are dead. Joe, we got to talk. I understand the same thing All the authors. Here's my perspective.
Speaker 6:Both reader and author. As a reader, if I leave a review or a rating, let's stick to good reads and I see that the author likes it, I'm happy about it. I know many people don't like that, but I'm always like oh okay, that person saw it and acknowledged it, even if Because likes sometimes are just an acknowledgement and more than a like I don't know Fine, if they come back to me and they know if it was a four star and they get back to me as a reader, they come back to me asking oh, if you like it, why didn't you give me five stars? Or why didn't you like? That would annoy me.
Speaker 6:I would never do that to my readers, even to those who don't understand. As I said, I wanted to reach out to ask a valid question, but I would never go and explain the book to them or explain to them how they should have read it or like it. I don't do that. Don't have the time, don't have the patience. But sometimes it's very hard in those cases when it's reviews that are deliberately harmful or just wrong, completely misguided and mistaken, and you can't even sometimes correct the name of a character. That drives me mad. I know if people are listening to the audiobook and the character is long.
Speaker 6:It's like oh you know it just gives me this Explain, not explain, but you know I'm glad you enjoyed it and it's spelled this way. It might be nitpicking, but I wish that you know there was a little bit more of goodwill from the part of the reviewer that not everything the author says is an attack on them. You know that we like books and we like our books specifically and we like to talk about them and you like people to get the most out of them as well, and just yeah, I don't think there's a solution.
Speaker 6:I don't think it's ever going to be fixed because everyone is different.
Speaker 5:Yeah, I see what you're saying, susanna. I agree that you know. If you want to just correct something, that is like, as you said, the audiobook and the character name, and that would happen Definitely. I'm listening to something especially secondary world, anything, sfs. The problem is, how would you monitor the system to make sure that it doesn't go into that, attacking the reader territory?
Speaker 6:No, you can't because you'd have to be an owner system and a lot of people just they don't have it. They just exploit as much as they can.
Speaker 5:I'm very much against this horrible practice of review bombing or whatever it is. I mean, I think you made a short video about this which I'm 100% like. You said review the book, not the author, Exactly.
Speaker 6:Yeah, but that's a whole different, that's a whole level.
Speaker 5:Anyway, I mean in that kind of thing where you're saying that it's malicious that a whole lot of people just dropped one star reviews, it happened to the narrow road between desires by Patrick Rothfuss, which was my most anticipated fantasy release in 2023. I think I went what? In October or something. I think it was at 2.2 or something. People just like blasted it with one star reviews, being like this guy is like this book is not out, e-archs do not exist, what?
Speaker 1:are you rating?
Speaker 5:this on. So that's a totally flawed system and I don't think that anybody who was keen to read the book would be influenced by that. Hopefully, because it's Patrick Rothfuss. I agree that if it was an upcoming author, this could have destroyed a career.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 5:That's terrible. It's horrible and I have absolutely no idea what works in someone's brain to do that. I've not read the book, but I hate the author, so let me put a one star on the book. The review is for the book and the rating is for the book. Why are we reviewing the author? It's baffling to me that I'll never get, but yeah, I.
Speaker 6:That is a consequence of social media, because, like I was saying we can't interact, we can't reply to reviews.
Speaker 6:We have to promote our books, but we can talk about them too much because you get annoying. You have to accept all reviews and you can reply to the reviewers, but you have to always be out there and talking about books and talking about writing and then showing ourselves. But oh no, but help or be the few, express an opinion about someone else's work or about some issue going on at the moment, anything personal, then it's going to be used against you. It puts in this position where you are always being judged. Everything you say or do will be used against your work, not you.
Speaker 6:And yeah, it was something that I was not prepared, I was not expecting to happen. And it is such a huge struggle and last year towards the end, I got really, really done and depressed and nearly quit Just because, yeah, and eventually I had to suck it up and realize, well, this is the way it is and I'm going to try to make the most of it. But it is awful. There were days that I was dreading to just turn on the computer and see, okay, how am I going to get upset today, what's going to happen? And even if nothing happens. What am I going to say to people today, this pressure to always put something out there, to keep a presence, to be interesting? I'm not interesting. My books are. Go read them. That's all you want to say, but you can't.
Speaker 5:Because there are too many books out there.
Speaker 6:So as well, you have to keep the system social, this self-promotion system. It's flawed.
Speaker 1:Just, joe, hold on. What's that? But, joe, thank you for coming by and be careful out there. Thank you, thanks for coming by and hanging out. Hope the tequila was good.
Speaker 4:Oh, it's delicious Thanks.
Speaker 3:Enjoy the rest of your day Thank you.
Speaker 3:Bye-bye, sorry, can I just say, starting to see for a second there. I've heard some concerning comments here. I mean, you know, I talk about her piece and then I get shocked by some of the things you guys say. But there's some people there that want to restrict who is allowed to read certain books. There's people that don't allow certain people to comment or whatever.
Speaker 3:I think to some it's got the more realistic sort of pragmatic view in the present day and age of social media and interaction. I think death of the author was a fine thing back in the early 20th century or up to the 60s, but I get the point of just letting the art do the talking of the artist and all the stuff. But we're in a new world and I think unfortunately, or for better or for worse, the conversation has to be a bit more fluid these days and because, like Susana, like you said, you could promote yourself and you could stay relevant, and I think it's perfectly fine for anyone to comment whatever, for even an author to engage in conversation and reviews, I mean so long as we all stay civil and polite. But I think disagreement and conversation in this day of you know, if social media is really social. That's what it's there for, and I think expecting anyone these days to put a book out there and not engage with its target audience is just not what the world is about these days.
Speaker 1:So I guess I have to ask is social media the problem? Because we talked about in the past what they're being. You know, the author or the creator could interact with the person reviewing their book or could not necessarily confront them, but just have an open dialogue, because they probably did that in person or on the phone or somewhere with signings.
Speaker 1:So there was. You didn't have that barrier of you know, you didn't have that barrier of saying whatever. I can say whatever I want, and it's just a name on a screen and I can be the you know I can say, I can say the most awful shit about somebody, and there's no consequence, there's like nothing. It's like and people may believe it, I can trash someone's work, I can do whatever I want, and if they respond, or if someone else comes in to help them respond, then they're going to get piled on too. But I think the anonymity of social media has exacerbated this problem. With I have, I can be an anonymous person. I can have a campaign to just destroy somebody if I want to, and it works.
Speaker 1:Sometimes, you know, careers get destroyed because of a personal, a personal beef, and so I think that's it's like like I said, it's like a fluid thing where I think the rules are changing and because of technology and the way that we live is changing. So is at what point, do you know, do we? How do we adjust, I guess, to this new world? And you know our brains are still adjusting to social media. Our brains can't process, you know, we can't keep up with the rate of technology. Just a little, a little monkey brains can't. So you know it, just it's. It's such an interesting conversation to have with. You know, if, if a reviewer can say whatever they want and an author can't respond, then the power lies in the reviewer, right? I mean, if the author can't, then where does that? I guess, where does that? Where does that? If everyone's being respectful, then is, should there be a barrier if everyone's respectful?
Speaker 3:Because who gets to decide who's allowed to talk and who isn't allowed to talk?
Speaker 3:Who gets to decide that the author cannot say anything anymore about their work after it's been published, and who gets to say that reviews cannot give one star reviews, or that certain people should refrain from commenting on certain genres because they don't know enough. So I think, since I don't know who can decide those things, I think you have to come back to just being polite and being, you know, civil, and and this course is there to be heard. I think it's inscapable these days.
Speaker 1:And glad you can come by Josh. Josh comments is social media the problem? Yes, just in general.
Speaker 2:So, yes, but it's social media is. It's still in its infancy, it's still just beginning, it's still just starting to figure itself out, and so there's going to be a lot of growing pains, like, like the, like, the anonymity problem that it has and other stuff. You know there's a lot of, there's a lot of bad characters on the internet and there's scams and there's everything else you know. So it's it's going to be a while before we start fitting in better to what social media is capable of.
Speaker 6:I really miss the old days of the internet, where the worst that could happen is you just see a penis. Everything you search for or every page. You would end up with the penis on your face, but that was the worst that can happen. Or these days is much worse.
Speaker 1:It's just so much more personal.
Speaker 6:Now, right, I mean it's that is the problem, because it is more personal and some people really take it really personal and it's hard for us to, you know, to like. For me it's very difficult to transition from me, susanna, to the author. I have to. You know it's playing a part and on one hand, people don't see the difference. And, yeah, I just hate this idea of attacking my work because of something that I said in a in a book discussion or because I don't like the same movie as they do. It's so ridiculous but it happens. People do that sort of thing and I don't have a solution. And you know, maturity pills, I don't know, there's no.
Speaker 5:I mean, that's the truth, that's truly a true.
Speaker 6:But it does happen.
Speaker 1:And this is an example that are much worse things.
Speaker 6:I'm not even going to get into politics, you know then. But yeah, and it's a mind filled because you have to multi-work and I think we're still learning to play with this new toy of social media.
Speaker 3:And you know, steve, you've talked to, you've talked to authors and you will have them, be able to have them that 20 years ago you know the reason, or part of the reason, your channel or your community exists. You know, during interactions with Ken Liu, with Jenny Words, with every other traditionally published author that you've spoken to, that would have been unthinkable 20 years ago. So it's, it's got. It's got us readers closer To writers. But at the same time it's a bit like with movie stars there's no movie stars anymore because once the curtain is full and once they, you know, stop being the character on the screen and they present themselves in social media, you realize what a bunch of morons these people are. So you know the whole thing about never meeting your heroes is true, because they are also normal people that say damn shit on the Internet, and I think we're all still learning to do that. So if you've got an ex account from any Twitter, people just close them down. It's where conversation goes today. That thing and take, talk out the cancer of society.
Speaker 6:Sex is not so bad these days. I keep saying I think it's better for all its worth.
Speaker 5:I know the bar is very low, but it is I wish, I just wish Musk would allow the feature of someone who doesn't have an account to crawl post, because I used to really like following some authors and get updates for books and things like that, and now I can't see anything. So I just wish like that feature would be, allowed.
Speaker 3:The problems that authors don't talk about their books on X, because they only write a book every two or three years. So some of the stuff they talk about like I couldn't care any less. I open Twitter account to follow authors and I don't care if X, y or Z are votes for X or Y candidate in the US, because, frankly, I don't give a man kiss. That's not why I wanted to hear from you and that was it.
Speaker 1:It's such, like Susanna said, though, like they think authors are encouraged to please the algorithm, to have a presence and to fill that empty space with something. So if you do write a book once a year, or once every two years, or however long it takes, you have to fill all that time with something and you're bound to say something stupid. I mean anybody will, because if you're there every day trying to stay relevant, to please the algorithm and keep you, keep you in everyone's feeds, and you know for when you do have a book to promote, you're there and people see it and you have that interaction.
Speaker 1:That's like you're bound to say something dumb. I mean anybody will.
Speaker 6:Yeah, and and yeah, it's just just one word. I once got blocked because I I can't, you know, I used the wrong emoji. Apparently I made it.
Speaker 6:Oh wow, I just you know it was a silly comment, teasing comment, someone that I had interacted before, so you know there was some. It wasn't just a stranger or the blue. I was replying to one of their head talk before and caught him in the, in the, in the bad mood and got to the why are you saying this? And I was. I was joking and I put the upside down smiley face, which at the time I thought it was appropriate for jokes, which apparently is not, and I said no, no, if you were joking, you would use this emoji. And I was just shocked looking at it. Okay, I'm sorry. And the I'm sorry then went through because I got blocked. This happened, so this is just just that, and I can.
Speaker 5:I can understand a little bit, susanna, how like I was also delighted to find the Patreon forum. It's like a beacon of calmness. But if you have had these sort of interactions, then how much more you must have felt this way when you came here.
Speaker 6:I mean I've, I've learned, you know, I've. I tried to copy what others were doing that I thought they were doing well. That exactly the same words. They don't work for everyone. I've I've learned that.
Speaker 5:But I mean like I still get hyper. Like you all are so calm and so polite and so sweet, like I can't imagine anything annoyed by anything you say, like I sometimes just like go into rant mode. I don't mean any, I will at all to anyone, I'm always joking. But I can understand if somebody doesn't know me or if somebody just finds it off-putting. So I totally understand if somebody finds me tremendously annoying. But I can't imagine like I had so many interactions with all of you like Jose, susanna, Steve, jared, and I just can't imagine any of you Like how how can anybody get annoyed by anything you say?
Speaker 6:I can be pretty abrasive when I'm in a bad mood. I know I I can be unpleasant. But, but you know, you would know if I was, you know if I was trying to be rude or unpleasant, you would know. You know, and you wouldn't, you wouldn't have any emojis attached. So it's it's days, smiley face smiley face, smiley face after every sentence. Almost just, don't misunderstand me.
Speaker 5:It's exhausting. Sometimes I'm so terrified on discord because what happens is I think Steve mentioned this and it's true like the conversation moves so fast and especially if I'm on a big, I am on one very big discord. So and I'm, let's say, we're having a bit of banter and I always sometimes think that you know if there's somebody new and they've joined and they're lurking and they see this banter, and what if it comes across as bullying? Three, four posts in bracket. I usually write we are friends, I'm just teasing, smiley face, so difficult I I it's like nonverbal cues are so integral to our communication.
Speaker 5:I think, as all of you were saying over for large part of our lives, that trying to adjust to the social media mode is quite, can be at least quite, challenging. It's not easy and I, jose, I agree with you, like I definitely stand corrected in this regard. I didn't think of it in that way which you said, that just as anybody should be able to read anything, why are we, why are you like me, why am I putting barriers on who should be able to comment on things? I will definitely reflect on this because I do agree, and especially after hearing what Joe and Susanna said, that it is a form of barrier. Maybe it's because I'm like it's, it's my personal thing, like I I'm terribly self-conscious and so I'm like what did I do wrong? Like that's my default mode. I would do the wrong. If somebody were to like say something, I would be like I messed up.
Speaker 5:But, like with the author liking thing, like there were two separate instances. One was Shawna Lawless, she liked my preview of the ER for her second book, and one was Susanna in my scenario, and I know this is really weird for people that I'm referring to her as Susanna, but then when I talk to her now and this is what I do, like my brain separates Susanna, my friend, and Susanna, the author. So the second life was from Susanna and my scenario, the way it should be. And she liked my review for Anacrony, which is like this tiny novelette in her series, in her timelessness series. So like those, those were I, I, it was not. I did not have any anxiety or anything out of that. But obviously if I put out a review of a New York and an author would come and tell me, well, so you didn't get it, obviously I would be like uh-oh.
Speaker 2:I mean, on a review front, there is maybe you disagree, but there is a difference between just general people reviewing and professional reviewers. You know critical analysis, I see. You know they're getting paid to do that stuff and so because they're getting paid to do that stuff, like the New York Times, what have you? Their stuff is in itself writing for an art in its own form and should be and should be definitely up for uh, you know, commentary on its own.
Speaker 5:Oh not totally and I mean this is continuing in this rich literary tradition which I think Joe was mentioning. Like you know, I think Mark Twain and somebody else you know they would write like letters to each other and they would be published in the papers.
Speaker 2:Quite, entertaining yeah.
Speaker 5:I mean that would be fine. But I mean, what about you, jared? If you put out a review of a book, would you mind if the author commented on it? Or I don't mind at all.
Speaker 2:Oh okay. There are quite a few authors that have contacted me privately after. I reviewed their books and that's fine too. That's very nice of them. But the um and uh, but I don't mind when they, when they uh, when they pop on either. You know that all the ones I've reviewed have been very nice, and so I haven't I haven't been doing it long enough to uh any, uh, strike up any vitriol or anything like that. And uh, I'm generally uh, I generally curate my reading beforehand anyway.
Speaker 2:So I'm you know, so I don't just pick up random books to Try out.
Speaker 1:I see you'll see Hold up Jared and Parmeet. But, Susanna, thank you. We know you have to run, but thank you for.
Speaker 6:Yeah, sorry I have to go. Thank you, I was enjoying the conversation a lot, but I do have to go, thank you so much for having me and hopefully we talk again soon.
Speaker 1:I'm sure we will Bye, thank you. I'm sorry, jared, I interrupted.
Speaker 2:No, that's right. Um, yeah, so that's like. Yeah, like you said, parmeet, the back in, back in the, uh, you know, back in the 19th century and 20 or 20th century even, um, there used to be, you know, there used to be letters back and forth and newspapers and stuff between either reviewers and authors, or author to author, and what have you, um and uh, and I'm sure some of those were probably uh, not uh all friendly all the time as well. Oh, no, they wanted all hilarious. Yeah.
Speaker 5:Some of them are hilarious, like hilarious for us to read. I'm sure it was not hilarious for the author to read.
Speaker 2:Right, yeah, but they were still well thought out and they were, you know, because they were.
Speaker 2:They were made for for publication in that case, um, and I think that maybe when, uh, the ideas of book signings came around, where authors could sit in a store and have people come in I'm not sure when that originated, but, um, then you would probably get a bit more of the uh, the uh, um, you know senseless uh type of uh commentary that you know you're a jerk type, you know, attacking the author basically, um, in person, uh, but it would be more rare because, like Steve was saying, there was no anonymity there.
Speaker 2:There was, it was in your face, uh. So, you know, you, of course, would hear about the occasional person flipping out at a book signing or something like that, but it was very, very rare. And uh and uh, we get up to today where the social media comes in and it just makes it so much easy to be vitriolic and and be an asshole and uh. So you know that's, uh, that's what we're dealing with and uh, it's, it's, it'd be good to be able to say whatever you want about whatever work of art you're um, you're participating in from an author or from a um or any kind of art.
Speaker 2:Uh, but it's also uh good to be, you know, respectful and it's good in. Some people on social media lose that because they uh because they're behind a wall.
Speaker 5:True, that's. That's, that's very true, do you? Uh, I would like to ask everyone, actually, but do you think that, um, independently published authors are a bit more vulnerable in this regard compared to traditionally published authors, or is it?
Speaker 2:Yeah, I think independent published, independent authors who put themselves out there are taking on a um, they're, they're very brave, they're taking on, I think, a big task, uh, to put themselves out there publicly because they have to do it all. They got to promote, they got to, they got to keep, they got to keep on top of stuff. Um, that like, uh, like a king doesn't have to Um and uh, so they're putting themselves out there, that in and it's and it can be.
Speaker 5:I have the maddest respect for that because it's, it's, uh, it can be quite harrowing, Um it sounds uh, from my limited experience with one or two independently uh published authors who have either published or in the process of publishing. Uh, it is uh creatively exhausting, which I guess is common in general to authors, but then it is also emotionally exhausting financially, concerning lot, lot, lot of lot of things with uh would.
Speaker 2:And some, you know some handle it better than others and uh, in some are in better position to do something like that than others are.
Speaker 2:Um, you know, I I had very limited experience with it Um 15 or so years ago and I wasn't even self publishing per se. I went through a very independent publishers should say, but I still had to do whatever promotion I was going to do on my own and I still had the. You know, if I wanted to have sell books, I had to buy some of my own so I could have them at signings or what have you, and the, and that was very stressful. It was very stressful. That was something that I did not like about it at all and, admittedly, you know one of the impediments to me continuing to try to publish stuff, it wasn't for me.
Speaker 2:You know, I was much more interested in just carrying on reading stuff for fun. But so, you know, everybody has their, their tolerance level about what they can put into it. And so if you're a self published author and you've made a living, or if you've actually gotten something out of it and actually gotten to the point where it's gone beyond your initial investment and it's gone to a point where you can actually step back and say, oh wow, this was, this was either a success or not, depending upon what my expectations were. You know, I had the maddest respect for that.
Speaker 5:Are you? Because I know, jared, you said that you try to curate your reading list quite carefully and you have quite a good estimate of what you're going to like, more or less or all that, is this something that you use to read a bit more indie books, like when you try to, when you prepare your reading list or when you have books on your radar that you might be interested in?
Speaker 2:Yeah, when I, when I started reading indie, independent, self published stuff, which was last December, it was because I saw an interview with the author, or and or I saw a review that wasn't just a star review. I don't tend to follow the any kind of star reviews. I tend to go to the longer ones, like you know, like Phil Chase does, or you know people like that and and I really listened to what the reviews about. You know, it's non spoiler, of course, but I really listened to what they're saying about what the book is, because I can tell I'm going to enjoy the subject matter in a book by that, even if the writing eventually becomes disappointing or something like that. I can tell pretty, pretty, like, people's taste, you know, I know when they line up with mine fairly well and and so I can tell by that. So, when it went, when I first, like I read von Roy Cross, all right, the severing son, yeah, severing son, yes.
Speaker 2:And I read that because of the review that Philip Chase did, and because, the interview I saw with the author he did and I liked what he was saying and I was like, okay, I like what he's saying, he's trying to do. And so then I read the book and I was like, yeah, he, he succeeded. He tried to do that and he succeeded, and it was well done. And so then I I did the same thing for Peele.
Speaker 5:Stewart and and of course I love it.
Speaker 2:And and of course I already knew Philip Chase, so I was. I was very familiar with his taste and how you know, and so I read his stuff and then, and, and so I'm. You know I'll continue on in that vein. As far as the self published stuff goes, I think there's there seems to be a lot of it out there now and it is, it is a lot.
Speaker 5:It's the. The difficulty is in sort of finding what might I mean I haven't figured it out yet what might appeal beyond the just try and see approach. So that is still something I'm I'm figuring out.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I'm wondering if I'll reach a point where it's like, Okay, now I got to go find something that I haven't already been exposed to in some kind of interview or whatever. I'm interested in Tori Tech and his new book because I've seen a lot about it and it looks. It looks pretty cool.
Speaker 5:But I think math, math is math on books.
Speaker 2:Yeah, he recommended it yeah. And so you know there's there's still plenty out there to get to. I don't see myself running out anytime soon. And you know. Then you get the other. On the other end of the spectrum you get the traditional public stuff which I just never seen can catch up on, because there's just a lot of authors I already like out there. So that's you know, it's not hard to stay busy that way.
Speaker 5:Absolutely, and I think you also said that you try to work in some rereads where you can. I think you're leading a Thomas Covenant read along in next year.
Speaker 2:I'm not doing the read along. I would like to try to talk about that whenever that comes up. Hopefully I can. I can read, I can probably refresh myself pretty quick, quick on it. But yeah, that's, that's, that'll be interesting whenever that comes around. Yeah, and I well, I've been touting Donaldson's latest series recently because I think it's nobody talks about it and I think it's really outstanding.
Speaker 5:Wow, yeah, I've never heard anybody talk about it. Yeah, Like the offbeat booktubers, like, let's say, of of beat I mean they talk about offbeat book, not that they're offbeat them so like rough, blue, tough or um yeah, I, yeah, I'm not seen. I'm not seen them talk about this particular one. How is it just like you've kept track of what Donaldson writes?
Speaker 2:Yeah, I've kept he's always been one of my favorites, so I just kept track of what he writes and it was my favorite book last year it was no that's period and nobody talks about it on the internet. It's set for me.
Speaker 5:I know people, yeah, rough says the same thing, you know, like he had. He mentioned these books which are like yeah, this exists. I'm like okay, I heard nobody listening to me?
Speaker 2:Yeah, he's reading.
Speaker 5:I mean to be fair, steve covers a lot of offbeat books as well. Especially, like you know, he finds like these really really sort of genre-wending stuff. I don't know how people who does it. So I want to ask you as well, like, how do you curate your uh to read list beyond your infinite read, along for which we are having an intervention, but you know, like stuff that you find interesting, how do you pick it up?
Speaker 1:Usually recommendations are, or just something that pops up on Amazon that looks interesting. I'll read the I'll I'll. I'll gently graze over the synopsis, trying not to read it too much, but we're all trying to all read. Go to Goodreads and look at the one star reviews, and I find a lot of books that way.
Speaker 5:Oh nice.
Speaker 1:Yeah, like this book is too weird one star. Or this book is too dark and violent one star, I'm like, okay, I'll try it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, the thing about Donaldson, though, is he's not a nobody off off, like he's very well known you know, and so that's what. That's what was. Uh, I was like nobody's talking about this series and you know he's like one of the staples of old finishing literature from the 70s.
Speaker 5:Yeah, it's what I faced with. Uh, ted Williams, uh his, his new series, the Last King of Ostonard, and he, he's one of my favorite fantasy authors and he's like what, late 80s, early 90s was memory Thorothon.
Speaker 2:Yeah, so I am like I have seen some stuff on Williams, though at least uh lately.
Speaker 5:Yeah, like they talk about memory Thorothon, but the Last King of Ostonard, the only person who's reviewed it, is Brandy Derpy, who has reviewed every single book in the universe. I'm telling you we'll find a book somewhere and he's reviewed it Like that. That guy has insane reading capacity, like mad respect to him, mad respect. And across genres like you do mystery, thriller, you know, historical fiction, literary fiction, classics, fantasy, everything you name it. He's read it.
Speaker 5:Um, yeah, but yeah, I mean, I'm so sad, like I think Steve uh also mentioned this, like he made a post about this that uh, just as it is important to encourage new authors, similarly it is also important to read the backlist of early authors who've been around for a very long time and who are still putting out new books. And, uh, as you said, like, uh, maybe this is a wrong notion. And I mean even the first. The chronicles of Thomas Covenant are totally, totally different to anything that you would like. You would like the way one can say that Okesha Narra is a bit of a token prestige, or maybe magician has a little bit of things. Thomas Covenant is doing something totally different. So even at that point, in what, 1977 or 78, he was breaking out of genre modes and doing his own thing, whether one likes it or not as a separate issue, but he was he was doing his own thing.
Speaker 2:And he was doing something quite different. And you can almost I mean, I'm still not sure about this definition of grim duck, I still have no idea what it is, but you could almost say that that Covenant was the original as far as that goes, because it was so deconstructionist and and it and it wasn't happy.
Speaker 5:Oh no, I gave up after book one. Yeah, it wasn't happy.
Speaker 2:I can add to the fact that it was not oh it was very tough, you know, and and I I liked that, I liked that about it and I loved all the the uh, because he later gets into a much deeper psychological examinations of the characters, but and I liked that. But you know, some people don't, but that's fine and but it was, um, it was, you know, it was dark. So, especially the second series it got a lot more dark and that's just his style. He's, he's a dark writer.
Speaker 5:Oh yes, um, I'm on a forum where there are some dedicated very few, but very dedicated readers of the gap cycles.
Speaker 2:And and.
Speaker 5:I asked um and and they say it's great so I asked them I was. I was like should I try this? And they were like parameter you've got no chance.
Speaker 2:No, you don't. I was like I, it is outstanding. It's one of the fastest page turning series I've ever read. It cause it was so exciting, but it was also very dark it goes.
Speaker 5:it was like buying it in the background as we speak. Yeah, I'm like adding it.
Speaker 1:I'm a specialist already from before.
Speaker 2:Yeah, Uh, so you got to be prepared for that. Uh, but it's but the his, um, his ability to just make you to turn around on a character as far as how you much you like them and dislike them, and go back and forth is incredible, and it uh, um, and his endings just uh, they really, they really hit the spot.
Speaker 5:So they stay with you.
Speaker 2:Yes, they do.
Speaker 5:Oh well, that's that's. That's one of the hardest things of Epic fantasy, I find, is to land the ending, that to be able to do that, multiple lines with multiple theories.
Speaker 2:Right, and that's why I'm very hopeful, uh, for wars of light and shadow, because I know I know. Jenny likes to stick to landing, so I'm very hopeful for that series. Um, and I loved the ending of Malzahn, uh, cause that was a unbelievable ending and uh, so endings are my favorite.
Speaker 1:She hasn't figured it out.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 5:I mean a mediocre ending or a bad ending can ruin a very good book for me. But uh, I can. I like I don't know beginnings or endings, which is more important because in a lot of the rings, uh, recently someone asked me to rank the three books and I was like it's fellowship or return, depending on which one I'm reading it. When I'm at a distance from it, it's always returned because of return of the king, because of covering of the shire. That's my favorite chapter.
Speaker 2:But when I'm reading fellowship, it's my yeah, I, I like the ending of fellowship. Oh what?
Speaker 3:I like how.
Speaker 2:I like how he leaves it there. I like how the fellowship, the fellowship of the ring, ends and how it leaves off. It's just, it's awesome. I love a lot of the rings too, but um, but, uh, yeah, that's uh, some people, some people like beginnings better.
Speaker 5:I think I'm more of a beginning person, because one of my favorite series is King Killa and another top series is the song of Eisenpa. I have to. I mean, my copium is that I like beginning, yeah.
Speaker 2:Game of Thrones was a great beginning that was really good.
Speaker 5:You're not a fan of name of the wind. I'm going to guess yeah, given your respectful silence of it.
Speaker 2:I just never read it, so I don't know, oh, okay. Never read it.
Speaker 5:Do you want to read it?
Speaker 2:and be sad with me. No, that's a sell.
Speaker 1:Josh comments Didn't see you, I didn't. I see red 900 books this year on the forum. You bow to no one.
Speaker 5:Who is? Is it me?
Speaker 1:Yeah, who else read that?
Speaker 2:I think that's a response to you.
Speaker 5:No, no, steve, I think today, listen, I crossed thousand and one, but that's because it was 41 volumes of buss up. Like that is just, you know, like that's not yeah.
Speaker 2:Thousand and one books in a year.
Speaker 5:Well, I mean, there are like DNFs in there and there are many, many periods. I think I read a lot of the rings three times, or either three, I think it's three times.
Speaker 2:I read 37 books this year, so it would take me how many years to read a thousand.
Speaker 5:There's a lot of manga and stuff in there. That's good night and anyway. But yeah, I bow to the funny. But it was just like see, when I got to 996 and I was like, four more I can manage. So then I read novel. There you go, but next year I have a resolution and Steve you have to. Well, all of you have to help me keep it. No long series.
Speaker 1:We can't even help you. We can't even keep up with what you're reading. You've added to your total like 11 books in like two days. How can we help you? You've probably read like five books during this stream.
Speaker 5:I'm being teased now.
Speaker 1:I know right, we just can't keep up. Alex comments I still have not gotten past chapter one of the doctor's circles.
Speaker 5:Steve, please promote so that we can get over this barrier. The thing is, I tried to convince him to join my Warren piece read along, which everyone is so excited about, even the people who are not joining are so excited about. But anyway, the point is, alex, he gave me this such a deadpan expression I wish I could replicate it. And he was like I'll think about it, my God, yeah, but I'm very, very excited about Warren piece which will. I mean, large parts of it are very boring, but it's good boring.
Speaker 2:Still thinking.
Speaker 1:Josh says help us, how, how teach us, how do you do it?
Speaker 5:I don't think like. One of the things that is true for me is that right now I'm between jobs, so my main work is reading Like I read all day. So if you had time to like read all day, you would probably get through a lot of it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you get a lot more done, just that's the way.
Speaker 5:And the second thing is like if you read a lot, then, like anything, with practice it becomes more smooth flowing. So some books are easier to move through, rereads are easier to move through, and then some some require more effort, but there's really nothing. It's not like I set out with some goal or anything like that, I just read and add it to good dreams, like my log.
Speaker 1:Yeah, josh comments. I don't know if I would have the capacity to read that much in a day, though it's impressive.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it is. Yeah, I don't think I could either. That's a lot, it's quite a bit A thousand and one books.
Speaker 1:No, I think I would have the capacity to read that much in a day.
Speaker 5:A thousand and one books no, I think you can easily subtract 50, 60, because lot, lot of DNS are there. I counted in early November. It was 805 out, when it was showing something like 850 or something and somebody actually asked me that, like, how many is it actually counted? And it will be, it will be something. Anyway, the point is that, yeah, but next, next year, my resolution one is more rereads and second one is to read more slowly and just get more out of the reading experience instead of just going book after book after book. I think, Steve, you posted about this a bit that this has helped you immensely when you moved from that mode of just getting through book after book to more deep reading experience.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it has helped a lot. But before we get into that, Jose, I know you have to go. Thanks for hanging out and know it's late for you.
Speaker 3:No, thank you again. It was a pleasure to see everyone and happy new year, because next time we may it would be 2024.
Speaker 2:So it's amazing, see you. Bye bye, see you.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think it's slowing down. I think burnout's a thing for us mortals anyway to go, you know, one after another, and those times when I would get to I would, I would be reading and it would. I would forget what I read a few weeks ago or even sometimes days ago, and maybe the book just wasn't that memorable, but I struggled to like to. I would have trouble describing it to someone if I have to explain it, you know, weeks later. So slowing down and just taking it slower with the words of light and shadow and Prince of nothing and the other reads we've been doing, it's really helped me just kind of focus on what it is and kind of just soak it all in and not be not being in a rush.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that's, that's why I only average about three books a month, because I do take my time and let it. Let it sink in. It's kind of funny because we were just talking about we just had the podcast about the stars, my destination, and we were all talking about how fast that book read because it was kind of an action packed sci-fi book and I went from reading that right into next reading grand conspiracy by Janie Wurz, and I read the first page and I was like I have no idea what I just read.
Speaker 2:I got to slow down because I was just in a fast reading pace on this other book and I was like wait a minute, and I and I like mentally had to say slow down, take this in, because you know Janie's writing one different plane than this one and you know. So you're right, you got to. You got to, you got to absorb what you're reading.
Speaker 1:Yeah, josh comments didn't Ars Scott Baker ruin other books for you? Yes, he did. He continues to, because those times when I just I just can't get into other things away, can get into his, especially if I go from one to another, if there's no break. For me that it's hard to even like. Janie Wurz does that too, because you, it's such a different reading experience that when you go to something else that just doesn't have that complexity or depth, it's just it's hard to to stay engaged with it when it just feels very by the numbers I guess you can say it's just hard to get into it, get a rhythm with it when it's very like surface level, I guess sometimes and if anyone else has experienced that like a book hangover.
Speaker 5:Yo, yes, I have a big one with Berserk right now. I guess that's manga, but still, and another one I had recently, and it's still continuing, is I read the collected fictions of George Louis Borges and then I read his selected nonfiction and he's one of those strange authors where he he conveys a lot, a tremendous amount, in very, very short fiction. His essays are also very short and part of me is just letting it simmer. But the other part of me, even as I was reading, I knew that I need to go back and reread this. And now that you just mentioned it, steve, I realized and I think, jared, you have also shared this activity about Malazan and, steve, you have shared this about the second apocalypse that when you got near the end or when you started the aspect emperor, it was one of these, or maybe the second book in aspect emperor.
Speaker 5:You knew you had to reread the series and, jared, I think you said the same thing, that is, you were reaching the end of Malazan. I can't remember whether it was told the Hound or it was crippled. God itself the crippled.
Speaker 2:God, yeah, but the crippled God, when I finished that the first time, I knew I was going to be rereading that series immediately, which is pretty rare for me. But yeah, what helped me with that? Because I understand what you're saying, steve, about getting in that mode, because that's how I was. That's how I was the first time I read Malazan. I was like in that Erickson mode of reading, that style and that depth, and I would often pick up a nonfiction book in between in order to really break things up, and so it would help me, you know, read something else without thinking that I was comparing authors or something like that, you know.
Speaker 1:Yeah, josh comments, pardon me, the hangover is probably five books in the next week instead of ten.
Speaker 5:I shall refrain from commenting One thing which I've made a very conscious decision is to not try any manga for some time, because I feel, whatever I try, the artwork was so immaculate over there for me that some comparison will deepen. Like, right now, my mode is I don't want anything new, I want something which is like Buzzerk or better, and I asked around some people and they were like good luck, that doesn't exist. That's like I'm just going to wait and read other things. In fact, I moved out of SSF altogether. I'm reading the general fiction now and then I feel again. Then I will come back to maybe manga again. One manga I can try next year. And I also made a pact that I will watch two movies in 2024. One I promised my friend is Interstellar and one I promised another friend is the Dark Knight.
Speaker 1:Do you know one films?
Speaker 5:I love Inception. I just have never watched. Inception is like in my all time favorite list, but I have never watched Interstellar.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I like no one.
Speaker 5:But there seems to be something, because I have a pact I will only watch two movies per year, and my friend was like you push Interstellar to the following year and you have to watch Dune part two. Nothing doing. So now we are having negotiation.
Speaker 1:Josh comments. Both are fantastic. Interstellar is probably my favorite, Nolan.
Speaker 5:Oh, wow. Mine too, oh really Really yeah.
Speaker 2:That's the only one I haven't seen. Wow, yeah.
Speaker 5:Jared buddy watch. We will fix a month and then we will both watch it.
Speaker 2:All right, I'll do that. I'll do that because I love all of the Nolan's other stuff, so I don't see why I wouldn't like that.
Speaker 1:No, if you like those other movies, you'll love Interstellar Great soundtrack and the amount of time they spent on the science behind everything is pretty neat Nice.
Speaker 5:How is the Dark Knight? Have you any of your favorite?
Speaker 2:It's my favorite superhero movie.
Speaker 5:Oh wow, I the person who recommended me. He recommended it to me because I was Joker and I really loved it.
Speaker 5:Oh, I remember when Phoenix was accepting a Best Actor Award in one of the awards not Oscar and not BAFTA, one of the others he said that last line of his acceptance speech was we stand on the shoulders of heat ledger. Yeah, he pledges award ceremony and I think his parents and his sister came to take the award because tragic circumstances. I was telling my friend all this and he was like you should watch the Dark Knight, you will like. And now I'm excited.
Speaker 2:Yeah, if you've ever liked Batman at all, then that's probably the subject of that.
Speaker 5:I don't think I know what Batman and Pumpkin exists, but I don't know anything about them.
Speaker 2:And.
Speaker 5:I know Glockham, he was like, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1:No, no, I think I think the no. I think the Dark Knight is good, I think it's pretty good, it just I know I guess the hype got to me a little bit. I think I expect you go into certain things with the expectations and it's good, it's just. It's just not my favorite.
Speaker 2:I don't remember if there's a lot. I don't think there is. I don't know if there are a lot of references to Batman Begins in the Dark Knight or no, if you know base the very basics about Batman, you'll be fine.
Speaker 5:Yeah, you should be all right. Yeah, yeah, I don't understand. I can just come on the forum and ask hello, I watched this movie. What does this mean? Of course you can and get some help, yeah.
Speaker 1:Josh, the water planet on Interstellar is by far one of the best movie imagery ever. You will love it.
Speaker 5:I'm really excited about it.
Speaker 2:Oh look who is.
Speaker 5:First point is Nolan and also the slightly sci-fi gaming, the Dark.
Speaker 2:Knight himself.
Speaker 5:Oh my God, what an intro.
Speaker 1:I mean, that's one of the nicest things that I've ever called my chart. I'm going to take that. It's yours, it's all yours. Thank you, it's probably a good time to start the. We'll just take a if you're listening, if you're watching or listening. Just we'll just cut the audio for the next portion. But so this is part two and we'll be back with part three soon. I don't know where Music plays Music Music, music Music Music, music, music Music Music, music, music, music, music, music, music Music.
