Monday, February 14, 2011

Candace Sams Archive #1


The Candace Sams Affair: The archived version (Part 1),

This, dear friends, is the tale of an author who decided to respond to a one star review. Some people think that she was off her rocker during that time while others believe that this was her attempt to boost sales by throwing a hissy fit. While her sales did show a temporary spike on amazon, it wasn't a huge one. Only time will tell where this leads…  (Note: the original account that held these logs was suspended off of lj, claiming that she was harassing another user. Candace Sams strikes again? Who knows?)

All of this is as it was posted on amazon. I have changed none of it, save to delete the some random HTML that I'd copied when saving these nuggets. Along with the author's posts, I have also included the responses by the various people who stopped by because in order to see the whole story you have to read what everyone wrote. None of the names have been changed.  (Second note: I’ve got the raws of this if you need it, but unfortunately I wasn’t able to keep everything like the original posts were like.)




Niteflyr One  says
It looks like this reviewer has something personal against the author. Apparently, he/she doesn't know that most titles of this kind are written to please an editor these days and the editors are sometimes wrong in asking authors to re-write to 'their' specifications. But this review was more a diatribe on a comparison of 'other' stories the reader liked as opposed to reading the title and reviewing based on the new kind of work that it was meant to be
 0 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion. 

In reply to an earlier post  on Nov 29, 2009 6:17 PM PST
PBB  says:
 I LOVE science fiction romance. Been reading it for years. Also love light hearted romances. Been reading them for years. Sams book was just bad. (And if a bad book is published just to please an editor should I read it, much less buy it?
7 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 29, 2009 6:35 PM
Niteflyr One  says:
And there you go readers...it's easy to play the critic...not so easy to take the criticism.
0 of 7 people think this post adds to the discussion.

Last edited by the author on Dec 7, 2009 8:44 AM PST
L. B. Taylor  says: 
I've never read any of Candace Sam's books before this, so there was nothing personal against the author. In fact, I thought when I read the reviews on Amazon it would be a great book to read. I love this genre but when I pay good money for something and the story is just plain bad I can't recommend it to others.

 I want people that read my reviews to know that not all books are four or five stars. That said, I would encourage authors to read 'Romance Pet Peeves' under 'Products Tagged With'. It's not just me, Niteflyr One.

 An added thought, Niteflyr One, one of my favorite books is Mrs. Mike. For several years I have been looking for the old VHS tape starring Dick Powell that came out in the 1940's because I would love to see the movie. I've read the book several times. So see, we do appreciate some of the same things.
5 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion.

In reply to  an earlier post on Dec 7, 2009 10:41 AM PST
Niteflyr One  says:
As stated before, it's easy to post criticism...not so easy to 'accept' it. These hobby-posters are known in the professional publishing world as, “hit-and-run”  reviewers. I would suggest readers view Harriet Klausner's reviews - she is a reviewer with experience.
0 of 8 people think this post adds to the discussion

 Last edited by the author on Dec 7, 2009 12:42 PM PST
L. B. Taylor  says:
I can read the editorial review(s) such as Publisher's Weekly on most pages to see what the book is about. I don't want a “professional” book reviewer's opinion though I wouldn't mind reading Ms. Klausner's honest review of a book- whether she liked a book or not, and why.

 I respect that you don't agree with my review. I still think the book is not good and can't recommend it to others.
4 of 5 people think this post adds to the discussion
In reply to an earlier post  on Dec 7, 2009 2:10 PM PST
Niteflyr One  says:
As before and ad nauseum, clearly it is much easier to rate a book poorly than it is for the reviewer to take criticism of 'his/her' own review. This becomes less an issue of review protocol and more an issue of 'do unto to others' but 'do not do unto me'.

 Again...I point to Ms. Klausner as a number one reviewer for Amazon.com. She knows that authors rarely have full editorial control; rarely do they have even 'scant' control over their covers or the language used in dialogue or even sequencing of scenes: love scenes, kissing scenes, scenes of violence, etc. These are ultimately controlled by editorial staff...very rarely the author alone.

 Ms. Klausner is reviewing with the knowledge that a professional reviewer would have. That is to say that she knows the titles are judged in relation to others of their kind, the differences inherent in trying new concepts as well as pacing, world-building, imagination, etc. While it is certainly 'any' reader's right to review, clearly there are some who are not as familiar with the industry, they are not even in tune with other cognitive readers when it comes to genres. Some are not even in tune with general fair-mindedness and comportment. Even readers who don't like books are not so generally vitriolic as the reviewer with whom I take issue.

 In short...the power Amazon gives, some would-be reviewers take to heart and readily 'slam' books over and over and over (as the reviewer in question has done time and time again). This becomes less a 'review' issue and more -sad to say - someone's willingness to wield a bit of power rather carelessly. There are 'better', more intelligent ways to review even poorly written books...for some less experienced and less well-read, this becomes an issue of either the book is a 'five' or it's a 'one'.

 The reviewer above cited conversations on blogs to prove his/her point. Those conversations were, on the whole, fraught with sophomoric comments blaming authors for all kinds of editorial decisions over which they have no or very little control (kissing scenes, cover content, love scenes, language, etc., etc., etc). The bloggers, as with this reviewer, used information based upon what they 'think' the author should or should not have done, to write their so-called 'reviews'. This is a little like most of us telling a gardener how to grow a rose even if we've never grown one ourselves and know nothing about how to do it. Once more...I point to this reviewer's previous comments - of other books - to make my point.

 This reviewers comments across Amazon - emotionally and not objectively made - have become riddled with what appear to be caustic remarks that aren't helpful. But this is the nature of many posters on Amazon. There is a tendency, because of some need for power, to vilify authors' works. The above reviewer, as I have stated, has made a habit of doing this very thing. This leads me to believe the reviewer in question is somewhat of a frustrated romance author - who could not get his/her own work published - or who cannot write a manuscript at all......there seems, therefore, to be a need to render rather caustic attacks and on those who 'can' write and who 'can' get published.

 In conclusion...the Internet has become a refuge for some who see 'their' opportunity to brandish a bit of power. Reviewing this reviewer's comments...he/she has made good use of hating a lot of books and letting the world know it.
0 of 9 people think this post adds to the discussion

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2009 1:56 AM PST
Deanna L. Fisher  says: 
Niteflyr - why don't you admit that you were the author of the reviewed book? it wasn't hard to figure out when you signed a previous review with your real name. you are now on my never read list.

No comments:

Post a Comment