The Next Big Thing

The very talented Jill Malone (see link below) tagged me to be a part of The Next Big Thing, where writers talk up their work in progress. That makes me #33. It sounds like a great idea, so here goes:


What is the working title of your book?

The title of my current work is Falling. I don't usually have "working titles." Once I'm well into the work and comfortable with it, the title will usually present itself. I find it easier that way, to sort of let a story name itself. So far, my titles have stuck. 

Where did the idea come from for your book?

I've always been fascinated by the concept of vigilantism, people who take the law into their own hands to deal out justice; also, by heros, both ordinary and super. I didn't consciously think of Falling in those precise terms at it's conception, it was kind of murky to begin with, but as the idea grew, it definitely encompassed those concepts.

What genre does your book fall under?

Intrigue/romance, as I see it. Someone else may label it something else. Genres are funny (and not so funny) that way.

Which actors would you choose to play your characters in a movie rendition?

This is an interesting question, because my stories are all very much like movies as they occur to me, as they play out in my head, how I write them, and how they read. However, I've never had any one actor in mind for any of my characters. I know how I picture them, but choosing a name actor to play a character has never worked for me. So I guess I'd have to say someone(s) unknown. Those kinds of movies, with unknown or just emerging talent, are often my favourites anyway.

What is the one-sentence synopsis of your book?

Former cop turned security consultant picks up a hitch hiker and discovers she is a vigilante wanted by the FBI.

What is the longer synopsis of your book?

Falling is the story of a former cop whose career comes to a screeching halt after she intentionally shoots-to-kill a fleeing rapist. Dismissed from the police force, she opens a private security consulting business, catering specifically to women who have been, or fear they may be, sexually assaulted in their homes. While enroute to a client in a different part of the country, she picks up a female hitch hiker, and after a night spent together, discovers the young woman is a vigilante, wanted by the FBI. When the two part company, the former cop begins to seriously doubt and question her own morals and ethics for not turning the other woman in.

Will your book be self-published or represented by an agency?

This book, like my first, Everything Pales in Comparison, and my novella, Forever, will be published by Bella Books.

How long did it take you to write the first draft of your manuscript?

Approximately two and a half years.

Who or what inspired you to write this book? 

This book was inspired by two different songs. I'm often moved and inspired by songs and compositions; in this case, a song called Ghosts by Kerri Anderson, and (not ironically at all) Falling by Alison Moyet. The latter provided the soundtrack to the scene where the two women first meet. The former is the underlying theme of pain and darkness, and, ultimately, the hope of redemption.

What else about your book might pique the reader's interest?

All of my work has a thread of hope running through it. This story is no different. There is pain, and confusion, but there is also humour, and beauty. The characters really are, in the end, trying to do the right thing. But hope is not always easily perceived.

(Please check out Jill Malone's The Next Big Thing here: www.jillmalone.com

www.rebeccaswartz.com

Imagine this...

I was recently a part of an author's panel discussion that took place in Asheville, North Carolina, at a lovely independent bookstore called Malaprop's Bookstore & Cafe.

This was an event that I had put together, after a failed singular attempt earlier in the year, when I was informed by the Events Coordinator that Malaprop's was choosing to do more group events, as opposed to single author events, in order to draw larger crowds. I was also informed that my topic of discussion, "The Evolution of Lesbian Fiction" was definitely acceptable, and so, I set about making contacts with that topic in mind, and the event came together. Ann McMan, Vk Powell, and D. Jackson Leigh agreed to join me, with Salem West moderating.

The event was a wonderful success; we drew a large crowd of mainly women, but with some males also present (okay, to be truthful, the venue was crowded). I had never been a part of a panel discussion and so the evening was an education for me, and a fine experience. The audience was visibly interested and engaged; this came through most clearly when our moderator, Salem West, asked pertinent questions of the authors, and those questions (and our responses) raised questions from certain members of the audience. I could see people nodding, smiling, frowning in thought, and itching to raise their hands to ask a question before the Q&A (which we did allow them).

The overall feeling was that the evening could well (and happily) have gone on much longer than the time allowed. Once the ball got rolling, and people's questions were being answered, it seemed that more questions came to mind, and we had a hard time addressing each individual's queries. Indeed, by the end of our allotted time, we were unable to do so. Yet one specific query, directed toward me post-event, comes clear.

Which is actually the point of this post.

It wasn't actually a question that was posed to me. Rather, it was an observation. And it was only by one person. But it was an observation that had three times been previously brought to my attention, though not quite so personally.

PLEASE NOTE: If you haven't read my novel, what will follow may be considered a spoiler. I don't consider it such, but you may, and so, you are thus advised.

The reader came to me and stated that she had thoroughly enjoyed my book, but that she'd had trouble with one part of it. Specifically, when Emma Kirby, the cop, chooses to wear a dress to a funeral. This reader (and a couple of others, so far as I know) had difficulty envisioning Emma wearing a dress, had difficulty even believing Emma would wear a dress (and I have been told flat out, once, that she simply would not), based on their notion of the character. Even my editor had trouble with this. What I have explained (even though I probably shouldn't have) is this:

Just because Emma Kirby is a cop, it should not automatically be assumed that she is butch. For some reason, within the (supposed) strictures of lesbian lifestyle, any lesbian in any kind of uniform is often thought to be butch. 

This is, of course, a stereotype. 

Personally, as a writer, and, more importantly, as an individual, I refuse to adhere to stereotypes. Not because I don't believe they exist (I do, and they do), but because in my work, those stereotypes are irrelevant. My characters are individuals, women who do what they do, are who they are, love who they love...in other words, they are just...women. I am not interested in portraying them as other than who they are. I have specific ideas of who my characters are; stereotypes do not enter into it.

(Sidenote: It interests me that no one has ever asked for my own visual idea of my characters. Where Emma Kirby is concerned, I've always envisioned a cross between Neve Campbell and Sigourney Weaver. A strong woman who possesses depth and sensitivity. This visual has always been very clear in my mind. I don't recall ever thinking how someone else might perceive that visual, considering how I wrote it...and apparently some didn't.)

More pointedly, within my novel, the topic is specifically addressed: When Emma is in the bar with her best friend Nikki, and she first sees Cathy Marks. Nikki replies to Emma's statement, ''She looks straight," with, "Yeah, well, so do you." At which point, it is clearly pointed out that Nikki believed "...it was Emma's lack of stereotypical attributes that attracted women to her." Here I clearly address the notion of stereotype, yet immediately pass by it. I don't recall making that observation deliberately, yet I must have, because I knew how Emma Kirby presented.

Further, when the topic of wearing the dress comes up, it is clearly stated why Emma would choose to wear a dress: "But for certain events, she felt that a dress was a more appropriate choice of outfit, that it denoted a measure of respect in specific instances: civic functions, weddings, funerals." 

So even though I spell it out blatantly, some readers skip right over it, or, in one case, decide to challenge me on it. And I know why this is; I asked this reader after the event, "It's because she's a cop, isn't it? You see her as butch." The answer was affirmative. And I knew that it would be.

As a writer, though, I've always known that what is in my mind may not be in the reader's mind. I too am a reader, after all. I always have been. I know what I see. And sometimes, when I read what an author has said of their story, their characters, it has most certainly not been what I have envisioned. And that's okay. It hasn't taken anything away from the story I have read, and it shouldn't.

My hope is that, where my story is concerned, what I strive to describe, my vision, does not take away from what my readers read and/or imagine. But if it does, such was never my intention. Yet, because I'm also a reader, I understand how it can happen. 

Which may be why a book should be read more than once. Or maybe that's just me being hopeful...

www.rebeccaswartz.com

Own up, baby. Own up.

I hate to sound like a broken record. But every day, literally every day, new developments come to my attention, and I feel the need to comment on these developments.

I am referring, of course, to being a newly published author. A newly published author in the age of the Internet.

I feel I must make a statement here and now, with regard to the Internet and some reviewers (of books, music, art, etc): The age of Internet is the age of cowards.

I may be new to being a published author, but I have seen in the past how people (let's call them reviewers, for lack of a better term) cloak themselves in the anonymity afforded them by websites like Amazon, or Goodreads, or other such sites, and feel free to then post reviews of artists works, scathing reviews at times,  without any concern for taking responsibility for their words. 

These are everyday people. People like you and me. People who read books, watch movies, listen to music. People who are suddenly afforded the opportunity to speak their minds about something they have read, listened to, partaken of. But these people do not share their actual names when posting their reviews. No. These people choose a nickname, a pseudonym, and THEN, these people feel absolute freedom to post vitriol, scathing vitriol in reference to a piece of work they have chosen to purchase, and decided they didn't like. Their courage to thus post comes from the anonymity afforded them by the very vehicle that allows them to post said review. 

It would never occur to me to do what these people do. 

First of all, I'm not one for writing reviews. Second, if I were to write a review, I'd use my own name. That just goes without saying. I wouldn't resort to anonymity (I'm not a coward). If you and your review are going to be taken seriously, it stands to reason you'd post your own name. That's the professional (and grown-up) thing to do. And third, if you don't like something, just say you didn't like it, and then point out what you didn't like in concise, well-structured, well-articulated sentences. That's what professional reviewers do, after all (ever heard of Pauline Kael?). They compile what they did or didn't like, and then they present that shit in a well-articulated, well-presented article that comes across as balanced, intelligent, and mature, regardless of their opinion.

As I said, it would never occur to me to do what these people do. And, quite frankly, I can only imagine how unhappy these people must be in their everyday lives, so unhappy that they have nothing better to do than to rip apart the work of an artist who has toiled far more toward the completion of a piece of work than the individual reviewing it has possibly  toiled in their whole lifetime. 

Now, don't get me wrong, I realize that the above statement is contentious. But you know what? To be reviewed by some lame-ass individual who just happened to buy my book because it looked interesting, and they then found out it wasn't, and THEN they decided, Oh, I have an Amazon account, and this nifty nickname that doesn't identify me, and so I can now spout off about my displeasure ad nauseum...

I'm sorry, but I simply cannot take such an individual seriously. 

For the record, because I do believe in honesty, I am posting this review of my own book (click on the link below if interested). I am also stating blankly that I am not unduly troubled by said review. I have checked out the other books reviewed by this individual (and you can too), and those thus flamed, and my opinion of said reviewer is no higher than it was. 

Let me state unequivocally: I do not write porn. I have no intention of writing porn. I am happy to disappoint this individual in this regard, since they seem to place much emphasis on the "sex scenes" and do not seem to have an actual grasp of, or appreciation for, the art of writing. 

Finally, in closing, I am, as stated, new to this publishing world. I have a lot to learn. I know this. But I will not allow a review such as this to brow beat me into submission, passivity, or apology. I write what I write. If you don't like it, say so. But if you're going to say so, don't be a fucking coward about it.

Fear has its use but cowardice has none ~ Mahatma Gandhi

http://www.amazon.com/review/R31EU5BMWMBCSO/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R31EU5BMWMBCSO

www.rebeccaswartz.com

"Assholery" is the word of the day

Last night I finished reading Orson Scott Card's latest novel, Earth Unaware, penned in collaboration with Aaron Johnston. The novel is a prequel, taking place before Ender's Game, the first in the Ender series, all of which I've read over the years. I've enjoyed the Ender series, though it did get a bit tedious toward the last couple of books. But Ender's Game was my favourite.

The most recent novel, which is the beginning of a new series, was enjoyable as well. In fact, I would say I liked it a lot. I'm fairly picky about my science fiction/fantasy reads, but these books by Card held my interest and were entertaining and engaging. I went to my Goodreads list, to give it a 4-star rating, and then I noticed that the very first review of the book had given it only one star. I was intrigued, and started to read the review. It was a good review, and I actually agreed with pretty much all of the points raised. Still, I enjoyed the book. And then, reading the closing statement of the review, I saw this: "...my disappointment with this and OSC's raging homophobia make it almost impossible for an impartial thought."

Whoa, I thought, where did that come from?

The reviewer does not expand on this statement. So I decided to Google "Orson Scott Card homophobia." Up popped numerous accounts/thoughts/opinions/articles on the subject. Orson Scott Card is a bona fide homophobe. Damn.

Here are some links to articles I read (the first one uses a very fine word, assholery, which is right up there with asshatery). It's not necessary to read these, of course. I just want to show that I've done my homework.

http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/orson-scott-cards-homophobia-affect-enjoyment-enders-game.html

http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2004-02-15-1.html (this one, written by Card himself, is really long--feel free to skim it--and he uses the term "lesbian women"...as if there are other types of lesbians.)

http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/hc.e.211703.lasso (Written by Card again, it proves the point one reviewer made, that Card should shut his trap, but doesn't. He undermines his once respected reputation every time he spouts off like this.)

There are countless other articles and opinions out there, but it becomes redundant, when it's obvious what the man's stance is.

However, what has been troubling me, what's been on my mind since I found this out late last night, is that I have enjoyed the stories this man has written. Ender's Game is considered by many to be brilliant (the U.S. Marine Corps Professional Reading List had made the novel recommended reading for several lower ranks up until 2011, after which it no longer appears on the list. I don't know why it was removed, and I don't particularly care). Having enjoyed this man's work, for the most part, and then finding out that he's an outspoken, homophobic asshole, it occurs to me to wonder, does this in any way affect my enjoyment of his work? Technically, realistically, no, it doesn't. I've already read those books, the enjoyment has been had. Does it colour my perception with regard to further work? Yes, it does. (And for the record, I only ever bought used copies of his work, and the latest was a library book, so I haven't lined his pockets with my own money.)

There are numerous people out there, writers, actors, poets, painters, who all have their own opinions, their own thoughts, their own feelings, on certain things, and some of them are racists, homophobes, anti-semites. But they act in movies, write books and poetry and music, they paint masterpieces, whatever they do, and I enjoy a lot of it. If I don't know of their views, of their opinions, then I shouldn't feel bad about enjoying their work. If I do know, and I still pay to see their movie, or buy their book, does that mean I support their viewpoint? Or does it merely mean that sometimes I like to watch a good movie, and the viewpoints/opinions of actors, directors, etc, don't matter? That I just want to enjoy the movie (or book, or whatever).

I can't know the opinions and feelings and views of everyone who ever wrote a book, starred in a movie, or made a record. And you know what? I don't want to know. This age of information, in my opinion, is the problem. People spouting off, as Card has, thinking we all want to know his opinion, or others being quoted spouting anti-semitic, homophobic or racist comments, who should know enough to keep their mouths shut when out in public. I don't want to know these people's opinions. Certainly not if they're hateful. I just want to read the goddamned book and enjoy it. I am aware, however, that such a mindset cannot, and does not, work in this world. But it's very, very disappointing to find out something like this.

And now that I know what I know, I cannot speak highly of either the man or his work...because an artist's work is a reflection of the artist. It would be, and is, difficult to maintain an objective, impartial stance, when I'm gay, and he hates gays. And is very vocal about it. I cannot unknow what I know. And I do believe that knowing is better than not. I believe that knowledge is power, and I would rather know than not. But I don't have to like it. And I don't like it. It bothers the hell out of me.

At the very least, you now know that about me.

Opinions are a dime a dozen

Are you familiar with Goodreads? If you're on Facebook, and you read (maybe a lot), it's possible you know of Goodreads, or even use it yourself.

For those not in the know, Goodreads is a site where you can list books you've read, and you are given the option of assigning a star rating to them (1 star = didn't like it, 2 stars = it was ok, 3 stars = liked it, 4 stars = really liked it, and 5 stars = it was amazing). It is very clear, when you hover your cursor over the stars, exactly what the numerological ratings stand for. You can also write a review of the books you've read. I choose not to do this, as I don't consider myself a reviewer, but also because I feel that the star rating system works well enough on it's own. 

Most of the books I've read have received either a 3 or 4 star rating. Some very few have received 5 stars, and a few have received 2 stars. Even fewer have received 1 star. Meaning I (just to clarify) "didn't like it." 

I like Goodreads. I read a lot. A LOT. And it pleases me to have a way to convey how I feel about the books I've read. I understand that it's just my opinion, but I think it's pretty cool to have something available whereby others (who may or may not value my opinion) can see how I, personally, feel about a book I have read. That is the sum of my feelings with regard to Goodreads. I certainly don't profess to know how others view it. I am, after all, only responsible for myself and my own actions and opinions.

So, imagine my surprise, when today I received a message from an author whose book I had assigned a 1 star rating. Keeping in mind that that 1 star rating means I "didn't like it," I was quite taken aback by the fury with which this author addressed me. My rating was viewed as a "personal attack," was considered "unprofessional" and "viscious" [sic], and my morals and ethics were called into question if I did not remove said Goodread's rating, and/or this individual from my Facebook friends list. I was also threatened with "repurcussions" [sic], and made aware that it works both ways, that my book was subject to the same rating by this individual, with a harsh critique to match (this, of course, makes no sense, unless you're 10, but there you go).

Apparently, I'm supposed to be nice to everyone. I'm supposed to play nice, and get along, and support all authors. By posting this rating, by showing my opinion, I was not doing anything of the sort, and was actually involving myself in "personal attacks" on fellow authors.Well, the last time I checked, voicing my opinion about a book I've read is not only allowed, but encouraged, and is not considered a personal attack. Or am I mistaken in that? It would appear, according to this person, that I am very severely mistaken. And that by posting a 1 star rating (which, remember, means I "didn't like it") I obviously "hated" the book, and if I hated it so much, I should have kept my opinion to myself, as it was very unprofessional to state this opinion. (I'm very clear on the difference between "not liking" and "hating" something. Yep, very clear on that difference. And I'm pretty sure Goodreads is too...which is why the 1 star rating specifically says "didn't like it.)

So what did I do? I removed the book and my rating of it, and then I removed the individual from my Facebook "friends" list (for clarification's sake, they had requested my "friendship," not vice versa). I did this not because I lack conviction or integrity, but because people like this, with their bullshit drama, and no life, and lack of their own conviction and integrity, piss me off supremely. I did, however, send a message back, and I did apologize. Because it is not my intent to upset anyone. It actually never occurred to me that someone would get upset over something like a stupid rating on a stupid app where it's understood this is JUST PEOPLE'S OPINIONS. It's not like I went on a diatribe and spouted hate speech all over the internet. And I've received my own 1 star ratings, and negative reviews, and I would never have thought to jump all over anyone who thus posted. Why the hell would I? Everyone is entitled to their opinion. 

However, from this point forward, I will no longer post those books I didn't like. Anything I consider to be a "1 starrer" is no longer getting posted. Because I don't need the aggravation of receiving any more stupid messages from people who have no clear perception of reality. 

And that is all I am going to say on that matter. Other than the fact that threatening me is just not a good idea. Oh yeah, that.

www.rebeccaswartz.com

It's not easy being mean

Today I decided I am officially a bitch.

Backstory: 

I went to Staples this afternoon, to get an inkjet cartridge (colour black) for a new printer which was boxed without one. It came with a colour cartridge, but not black, which, when you think about it, is just plain stupid, but of course, is also probably brilliant marketing. And since I'm a writer, and suck at marketing, they will not starve, while I will. 

Anyway, I went to Staples, and almost immediately saw the wall full of inkjet cartridges. And I do mean "wall full." I've never owned a printer (which my sweetie thinks is appalling, but she's a graphic artist, so I'm not offended), and I can't clearly recall the last time I ever had to buy an ink cartridge, but the sight of an entire wall filled with choices was almost awe-inspiring, but was really more annoying. And if you knew me, you'd know right off that when something is annoying, that's a bad start.

I walked up to the wall of cartridges, and my eyes quickly scanned it, until I found the Lexmark section. I don't know how many cartridges there were, but if I were to assign a number, replaying that image in my mind, I'd say there were at least 40. But probably more. Which is daunting, to say the least. I had no idea how I was to know which plain black ink cartridge I was supposed to choose. I vaguely recall a time when buying an ink cartridge for a printer was not so complicated. But that was a long time ago, like maybe 7 years. I was hopelessly out of touch with what I now faced.

At that point, a salesperson suddenly appeared at my left side, as if out of nowhere. A very large male salesperson. With some sort of breathing problem apparently: he was wheezing softly. 

"Can I help you?" he asked, very solicitously.

"Well," I said, shooting him a glance and then quickly looking away, "I'm trying to find a black ink cartridge for a printer." I held out the slip of paper upon which I'd written the model number of the Lexmark printer. "I have the printer model number, but how do I find the right cartridge for it?"

"Oh, well," he said, a bit breathlessly, "printers are...well, they're complicated and confusing, and kind of touchy, and really, I only like one printer," and he suddenly shot his arm out to point, past and behind me, where I knew the shelf of printers was, "and it's that one, it's so straightforward, and..."

In the space of time it took him to lay this spiel out, I'd spied the plastic booklet attached to a clip before me, at about waist level. It obviously held the information I needed, the various printers names on it's cover, and undoubtedly, the types of cartridges required for them. I reached for it, and began to quickly flip through it. 

While I did this, the fellow next to me was still expounding on the merits of the printer he favoured. When I found the Lexmark name in the booklet, I didn't even look up. It was obvious to me he hadn't a clue about ink cartridges, and I was further annoyed with him.

"You know what," I said flatly, as I looked through the booklet, "go help someone else, because you're not helping me."

I literally felt the guy deflate. He stood there for about two seconds more, and then quickly departed. And I thought briefly, Wow, Rebecca, that was rude. And you know what? I didn't really care. Because why would someone who is supposed to be a salesperson, who supposedly should know the products of the store, offer his help, when he obviously doesn't know how to help with the product I'm looking for? What did he hope to accomplish? I have no idea.

When I went back to my car, I realized I'd been a perfect bitch. And that I no longer have the patience (and haven't for awhile now) to deal with people who have no idea what they're talking about. If you don't know something, if you can't help, then say so. Don't waste my time, and yours, spouting off about something in an effort to impress, to someone who is not easily impressed, and who is present for only one thing. Because I now realize that I won't put up with it. Once I would have. Once I would have been patient, and long-suffering, and then been irritated further once I'd left. But I don't do that anymore.

When I related this story to my sweetie, she laughed. "Oh, no," she said, "you in that situation? That's just a bad scenario all around. You just don't have the patience."

She knows me. Better than I know myself, sometimes. Because I do believe I have good intentions. I don't mean to be mean. I'm not a mean person. But I simply no longer have the patience. And if that makes me a bitch, well, I'm alright with that. Because I found what I needed on my own. And maybe that guy actually did go help someone else. Or will. Someday.

(Oh, and as it turns out, you can't buy just a single black ink cartridge for this printer. You must buy it bundled with a colour cartridge. Which was already supplied. See what I mean? I'm STARVING!)

To review or not to review...

The other day, I read a comment made by an author in regard to marketing and promoting of one's work. The author (who may be fairly successful and fairly popular, though I really don't know as I've never checked, and frankly, wouldn't know how to even if I were interested) provided suggestions for promoting a book, one of those suggestions being that a writer should not be shy about asking readers who have sent good feedback to write a review on Amazon. 

This topic has bothered me greatly, and so I feel the need to talk about it.

I have no problem with how anyone chooses to market and/or promote their work. At least I don't think I do. I'm sure there are myriad ways a writer (any writer) could choose to do so, and I'm certainly not familiar with all of them. On a personal level, however, having received extremely positive feedback from readers, either who are known to me or are complete strangers, it has never once occurred to me to ask them to write a review on Amazon. Somehow, ethically, to me at least, that just doesn't seem proper.

I understand the purpose of these "average person" reviews on Amazon (and on Goodreads). I do. People like to know what the everyday individual thinks of books they, themselves, might be interested in, or how that person's perception of a book they've read compares to their own. I get it, I do. But not everyone considers writing a review of the book they've read and enjoyed (preferring, perhaps, to keep that enjoyment to themselves), and not everyone is comfortable writing a review, thinking that such things are better left to those whose job it is (even those who may have grandiose ideas of being reviewers). I don't even feel comfortable writing a review of a book I've enjoyed (or even one I haven't), though I will share publicly on my Facebook a brief slurry of synopsis and thoughts.

Currently, I have exactly one review of my book on Amazon. It was posted there at the same time I was made aware of it on my publisher's website. That review was written by a bona fide reviewer, and I was very pleased and surprised to see it posted so soon after my books release. My publisher is in charge of sending copies of my novel to known reviewers. I sent one copy myself to another known reviewer, and that review was posted (not on Amazon) just under a month later, again surprising and pleasing me.

I'm new to this writing life. This world of writers, publishers, marketing, promotion. I'm learning as I go along, and for the most part, it's been a pleasant learning experience. I haven't been shy about talking about my work, or about sharing my work. I hand out business cards, talk my book up with complete strangers (in my usual reserved fashion), and point people to my website. I share the positive, and I share the negative; I'm fully aware that not everyone will enjoy (read: like) my book, and I think that even a bad review has its merits (okay, no, I'm not sure I think that at all, especially after the one - and only -  negative review received thus far. What a silly piece of work that was). 

It would be lovely to see reviews piling up on Amazon, or wherever. But I'm not going to ask my readers, who take the time to contact me privately to let me know how much they've enjoyed my work, to then post a review on Amazon. I can't even imagine doing this, let alone how I would phrase it. It somehow seems so very self-gratifying, and self-serving. Which, you may argue, is exactly the point. And I suppose it is. But I personally just can't imagine doing it. If someone chooses to post a review, of their own volition, hey, I'm all for that. Of course I am, why wouldn't I be? But I am not going to ask my readers to do so. And not because I'm shy. I most certainly am not. 

There is one other topic I'd like to discuss, briefly, while on the subject of posting reviews on Amazon. A while back, I was privy to a discussion, the gist of which I gathered centred around a review posted by the spouse of an author, and how the objectivity of said review could not be guaranteed, because, well, I guess all spouses opinions of their partners work is biased, and whose spouse wouldn't say good things about, or give 5 stars to, said work? Some participants in this discussion went so far as to suggest that it would be prudent of the spouse of any author to state said relationship clearly, upon which (I'm guessing) the posted review could then be discounted as unreliable and wholly biased, as is only right and proper, in their eyes.

Now, I suppose this discussion may have come about for some very good reason, but for the life of me, I simply cannot think of one. Okay, wait, before you lambaste me for being naive, I do know there are people out there who would do and say anything in favour of their spouse. And yes, you’ve got to wonder about those people. But really, if you’re serious about your craft, if you know your stuff, if your work is good, you know it’s good. Simple as that. It’s nice, very nice, to have other people say so. Of course it is. Validation is a lovely thing. But if anyone, ANYONE, ever suggests that my sweetheart, who is the very epitome of intelligence, discretion, and discerning taste, would ever support a piece of work of mine that was not the quality both she and I (and everyone else who knows me well) expected, I will thrash that person. Whatever the shortcomings of some spouses of some writers, those shortcomings do not apply to my sweetheart. Nor do they apply to my friends. I am far, far too particular to associate with anyone who would mislead in this manner, simply in an effort to stroke my ego.

One more thing: Before anyone decides to comment, I’m aware of the apparent contradiction here, that by virtue of my even bringing up this topic, I am thereby asking (0r suggesting) readers (now) post reviews. Such a thought process on anyones part implies that my readers are a) easily manipulated and/or guilt-tripped, b) unable to think for themselves, or c) stupid.

FYI, my readers are d) none of the above.

(Update 08/24/12 - After some understanding and encouraging discussions, I've come to see that there is nothing strange at all in asking readers to post reviews. As I said, I am new to this writing world, and new to this kind of self-promotion. But I'm learning!)