Reader Bloggers Vs Online Authors - Just A Myth? Or Is It For Real?

You know what really chaps my arse?

People (Read: some authors) who are so twisted up with bitterness, that they simply refuse to see beyond the end of their own noses. These people (read: some authors) point blank refuse to acknowledge that sometimes, their (mostly perceived) 'enemies' are right.

They consistently take the opposing view, just because, they can't bear the thought of conceding that sometimes these people, who they hate beyond measure, might actually be talking sense. It's a strange phenomenon, and one that I've only ever experienced, with very young children, until recently. (You know, the game that you play, where you say the sky is blue, and the child says it's black?) I've seen more examples of this, over the past couple of weeks, than ever before.

Every author, who's ever tangled with a Mean Reader Blogger, predictably came out with their own twisted version of events, with regards to the plagiarism lovefest. They 'gleefully' bashed the SBs and DA, whilst lamenting how terrible it was that those bitches (paraphrasing of course) had put a 71 year old through all this stress, and brought shame to the genre, (and God, can't they shut up already?) yada yada yada. My head still hurts from all the sneaky sideswipes.

I wasn't surprised by any of it, as it happens. Unfortunately, I do tend to have low expectations of romance authors in general (I love the exceptions obviously), so this was just par for the course, as far as I was concerned.

It was a shame though, especially for the absolute lovers of the genre. And whilst I admit that bloggers like myself may have played a part or two, in fostering those very negative feelings that some authors have towards Reader Bloggers, (no apologies for that I'm afraid) it seems to me that some of them (authors) seem to forget about the majority of the bloggers who simply adore the genre, and want to promote it, every chance they get.

Readers like KristieJ for instance. There are more KristieJs out there, than Karen Scotts. You guys know that, right?

And also, let me say here and now, that in my opinion (and of course I'm rarely wrong) The SBs, and the gals at Dear Author have done more for the genre, than a lot of the authors who have partaken in the Reader Blogger-bashing and the faux hand-wringing that's been taking place in Romanceland of late.

These women do a really great job, (for those people who need things explaining to them, I'm talking about the SBs and DA) in the Blogosphere, and without their presence, I think Romanceland would be a much less interesting place to visit.

By the way, if you're wondering if I'm talking about you, I probably am.

(And for every person who suggested that this whole issue has just been about blog hits, you guys really need to think about that some more.)

Question Number Two...

As an author, or even as a publisher, would it not be a good idea to have at least a basic grasp of the English language, seeing as you work in an industry where words are all important?

Also, if you are a publisher/author, and you’re trying to make a valid and noteworthy point (possibly also known as defending the indefensible), would it not be a good idea to check what you’ve written before you press send?

My advice is to at least use the spelling and grammar checker in Word before you confirm to the world, that not only are you probably not a good business person/writer, but you also obviously have a problem stringing a coherent sentence together on paper.

Aspiring authors, if you receive any correspondence from a publisher who wants to offer you a contract, and you can barely understand what they’ve written, you might want to consider not signing with them. Or at least check to see if they have a legitimate reason for their rubbish literacy skills.

One thing I’ve learned on Blogland is that bad things seem to happen to authors who seemingly can’t get themselves together enough to write coherently.

It's ok for me to be incoherent, and use shockingly bad grammar, this is just my hobby, not my job.

Just sayin.

Why Can't The Women Be Billionaires Too?

You know, we constantly harp on about romance being all about fantasies etc, but somehow, when it comes to giving the heroines we read about, brilliant, exciting jobs/careers, a lot of romance authors seem to take a backward step.

If I read about one more heroine who works in a flower shop or is a struggling P.A, I'll gnaw my own arm off.

Every other HP (that would be Harlequin Presents, not Harry Potter) that I look at has the word 'billionaire' in the title somewhere, and they're usually referring to the bloke.

Why can't the billionaire in the title be the heroine? Now wouldn't that be a novel idea?

I sometimes get irritated by the way some authors use particular jobs to stereo-type the heroine. Case in point, how many librarians have you come across in romance books that have fun exciting lives, go out with their friends, and party like it's 1999? Not very effing many.

Most of the librarians that I've come across in books, have either, never had sex, or perhaps had bad sex in the back of a car with some bloke named Bobby Joe, ten million years ago, so decided that sex wasn't for them. Or else they go home to their cats, and the highlight of their night is when they have to water their Chrysanthemums.

Every now and then, you get the heroine who's an accountant, or a lawyer, but more often than not, as with librarians, this just seems to be a way for the author to demonstrate how dull, boring, and over-worked she is.

Case in point, the heroine in Cindy Kirk's When She Was Bad.

The heroine, Jenny Carman, hasn't had sex in six years because she was too busy working her way up the ladder as an accountant in a big firm. (Does this mean that accountants don't have sex?). When she doesn't get the job that she's coveted for ages, she decides to ditch her goody-two-shoes image, and act like the bad girl, slut-ho she secretly wants to be.

Don't get me wrong, I'm enjoying the book, but I do find myself getting irritated by the implication that you can't be an accountant and lead an exciting life.

Why can't heroines have great jobs too? If we're going all out on the fantasy angle, would it be asking too much to give the heroine a half interesting career, without turning her into an uptight mare, who thinks that sex was invented just to stop her from achieving her goals?

Just once, I'd love to read about a heroine who was the billionairess, without the money being inherited from her wealthy daddy. I know that in real life, it's not that common an occurrence, but it does happen every now and then.

I'd also like to read about a heroine who's the president of a company, rather than the personal assistant.

I'd like to see more books with the heroine as a soldier. I've mostly given up reading s.e.a.l/military based romantic suspense books, but I'd probably give them another go, if it was the heroine who was the soldier, not the guy.

Do you ever wish that women in romance books, were on more of an equal footing to the guys, with regards tro their financial status? Also, what jobs would you like to see heroines in romance books given?

How Has Your Blogging Style Changed?

I’ve been blogging for two-and-a-half years now, and in that time, I think I’ve changed my style of blogging.

In the early days, I was very supportive of authors, hence the interviews that I used to do.

Then I discovered that a lot of authors online only love you as long as it’s not their books that you’re dissing.

The main change in my attitude towards authors came with the whole Changeling Press fiasco, when the owner of Changeling, Margaret somebody-or-other took offence at my criticising their terrible covers. Then I read a very passive aggressive post by Dakota Cassidy, where she didn’t name names, but was clearly talking about me, only she didn’t have the guts to actually say so, and when questioned about it, denied that it was anything to do with me.

The fact that she delinked my blog, made a liar out of her, especially when I remembered that she’d done exactly the same thing when she deemed that The Smart Bitches were a bitchy lot. Something to do with their harsh review of one of her author friends if I remember correctly.

Prior to that, had been the Mary Janice Davidson’s post at RTB, where she used the word 'reviewers', and 'asshats' in the same sentence.

In recent times, there have been several incidents, including the whole Gail Northman/Triskelion affair, as well as the Carol Lynne, and Jaid Black row.

A recent comment on here by some author called Anne Caine, after I blogged about the similarity between her book and Carol Lynne's latest, pretty much cemented my opinion of e-pubbed authors. Those gals are definitely more sensitive than the rest.

I’m definitely not as supportive of authors themselves, as I used to be. I’ll probably never do another author interview again on my blog, and I mostly avoid reading author interviews elsewhere.

I’m still a huge fan of romance books, but these days, I tend to avoid books by authors who have been…‘tainted’, shall we say.

Another way my blogging has changed is that I review a lot less than I used to. At one point I used to review one book a week, (I know, not exactly prolific) but these days, I simply can’t be arsed, unless I feel strongly about a book. (Apologies to those people I still owe reviews to.)

I don’t discuss my personal life as much as perhaps I used to. I think that’s probably due to the amount of people who now read my blog. In the early days of blogging, getting a good number of visitors always used to excite me, but contrary to popular belief, my blogging is never about that these days.

I also no longer comment at as many places as I used to. I used to be a regular commenter at RTB, but none of the authors who blog over there, hardly ever blog about anything worth commenting over. And to be honest, much like author blogs in general, I find the daily columns tedious as hell.

Every now and then, I’ll throw my two cents worth in, but I don’t even do that so much now.

I’m not alone with the commenting thing, I believe that this is something that happens as a general rule to long time bloggers. When you first enter Blogland, the blogger is bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, and they want everybody to know that they have a blog, so they comment on every single topic, on every blog, hoping that people will follow their link.

Over time, The Blogger realises that other people’s blogs can be fraught with danger, so they pretty much stick to their own blog. I’m sure you guys have noticed that rather than arguing with people on their blog (Monica doesn’t count), I always bring the issues here.

One thing that has definitely changed is the amount of e-mails I receive from various authors/bloggers, with various bits of Romanceland gossip. I’m not a ‘breaking news’ kind of blogger, so I generally wait until somebody else blogs about it before adding my tuppence worth.

One way that my blogging style hasn’t changed is that I still cover a variety of subjects. I refuse to only talk about books, because sometimes, even I get bored by book talk. Sometimes I do want to talk about what’s going on in the world, and for me, it seems particularly irresponsible to keep to book-related topics, when there are important events happening in the world.

Another thing that still hasn’t changed with regards to my blogging, is that I pretty much still say what I want to, regardless of who I might offend. I never really considered myself a snarky blogger, and I still don’t if truth be told. That’s a label that I’ve been given, rather than promoted, myself. I just say what’s on my mind, and let the rest take care of itself.

Let’s face it, if I wasn’t as forthright as I am, most of you guys wouldn’t even bother visiting would you? Even those people who think I’m the pits still can’t keep away from my blog. The irony of that always brightens my day. *g*

Anonymous Commenters Need Love Too. Seriously...

Hey murderers apparently need love too, so why shouldn’t Anons? *g*

KristieJ has an interesting rant about anonymous commenters, and how they should really have the courage of their convictions, and post under their real names, or at least their online personas. I started responding, but then it got waaay too long, and the only person who’s blog I feel comfortable bleeding over is Monica’s, so I brought it over here.

I'm not too fond of anons myself, mostly because I'm nosy, but I recognise the need for some anonymity in Blogland, or should I say Romanceland.

The fact is, there’s a lot of back-biting in this here Romanceland, and basically, what goes on the net, is forever cached on the net, so I can understand why an author would prefer to say what they have to say anonymously, than get tarred with the Fucktard Brush. I say that even as the person who often holds that very brush.

The reason I’ve homed in on authors is because I believe that the majority of the people who anonymously commented on my various EC posts were authors.

And I mention EC because the number of anon comments seemed to increase whenever EC was the subject, which leads me to think that the majority of anons were either, authors from EC, or people who have had dealings with EC in the past.

If this is the case, then I’m not sure I can blame them for saying what they have to say anonymously. I hear that the higher-ups at Ellora’s Cave are fond of suing people.

It's easy for me to say what I want, about who I want, when I want, but then again I'm not a writer, aspiring or otherwise, so there can be no repercussions for me. My career is not dependent on you guys out there. I simply have nothing to lose.

The same can’t be said about authors who decide to tell it like it is. Especially those authors who are e-published.

There are disgruntled authors out there who aren't happy about one thing or another, but are too scared to take a public stand, because the repercussions for them could be a lot more far reaching.

They could take a public stand, and say exactly how they feel, but then they’d probably become persona non gratis with their peers, readers, and their publishing company. (Read: see Authors Who Should Know Better list) Who needs the hassle?

The same goes for anon readers who come on the blog to berate me for one reason or another, or just to slag me off because they don’t like my online persona. The fact is, the majority of those people are scared too.

Of me.

And why shouldn’t they be, let’s face it, I’m not afraid of tearing a strip off people who annoy me, and they mostly know it, and want to avoid the hassle.

I’m just imagining the number of people going crazy because dammit, they aren’t scared of me. My challenge to those people is, if you truly aren’t scared of me, then post a comment, using your online persona. Tell me I’m a jumped up bitch from hell, if you dare. I promise, I wont be mad. (At the very least, I'd know which blogs to avoid in the future. *g*)

In short, even those people who come on and tell me that they think I’m wrong, have an absolute right to their anonymity. Does it annoy me? Of course it does, but then so do people who belong to the ‘If You Have Nothing Nice To Say’ brigade.

Even more annoying than those people, are the ones who claim they’re fed up of blog dramas, yet come back again and again, to watch the train wrecks, whilst trying to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony on their own blogs. The hypocrisy always makes me want to smile. You know who you are.

Anonymous commenters are cowardly by the very virtue of the fact that they daren’t openly say what they feel, but I’m not going to condemn them for that, because in my opinion, they’re just being practical.

If people don’t know who you are, then those bitchy comments that you made anonymously once upon a time, when you forgot to take your meds, probably wont come back to haunt you later.

Sounds like plain 'ole common sense to me.