How to be a TOTAL LOSER as an Author...

[seawasp]

Well, there's many ways, but Mr. Kevin W. Reardon wants to make sure he's covered them all.

First, have someone include something negative in a review of your work.

Then go argue with him.

Then suggest he commit suicide. Twice, adding in a pet for good measure.

Now, that's bad enough to reach about the bottom of the barrel. I mean, Anne Rice simply made the FIRST mistake and that made HER look like a total luser.

But Mr. Kevin W. Reardon is not yet finished. He has aimed his sights lower. Much lower.

Wait for someone to post a blog summary of various author misbehaviors. One in which you are just one of many.

Then find blogger's phone number and call her at home, making you into a stalker!

THIS is the magnificence of Mr. Kevin W. Reardon.

Have I repeated his name enough times so that none of you will forget this shining example?

Remember, folks: NEVER ARGUE WITH A NEGATIVE REVIEW. But if you must, don't go beyond this; there, only Mr. Kevin W. Reardon dares go.

Comments

[j-v-lynch.livejournal.com]

I review books for SFSite (none of yours yet) and I finally got my first argumentative/whiny response to a negative review. I've been wondering if I should respond. I think it's clear that the answer is no.

[seawasp]

Well, if you do post a negative review of mine, let me know so I can flame you, tell you to hang your dog, and stalk you. Oh, wait, that's what NOT to do, I have to keep these things straight.

[j-v-lynch.livejournal.com]

will do.
but just FYI, I don't have a dog.

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

Dang, and I was so looking forward to watching Ryk say "I'll get you, my pretty! And your little dog, too!"

[seawasp]

So you should get one if you decide to give me a negative review? Or do you have cats? I suppose small children would do, too.

[julesjones]

Dear Lord, is it the season for crazy authors? And did Reardon not learn from his *last* attempt to intimidate someone that this only gets him the sort of attention that proves that there is such a thing as bad publicity?

[seawasp]

It would seem the answer to "did he learn" would be... wait for it...

NO!!!!

I'm betting not this time, either.

[dsgood.livejournal.com]

There was a man in our town,
And he was wondrous wise.
He jumped into a bramble bush
And scratched out both his eyes.

When he saw what he had done,
With all his might and main
He jumped into another bush
And scratched them in again.

[seawasp]

Some authors take these reviews personally, unfortunately, and haven't found a mechanism to either (A) separate their reactions from the novel so that what people say ABOUT the novel doesn't make them feel it's something they're saying about the AUTHOR, or (B) armor themselves in pitying arrogance: "The fools are too dull to comprehend my brilliance; but no point in arguing with them, for they would still not understand."

There are some reviews which can cross the line to being personally offensive, but even THEN it'd be a fool's game to try arguing.

Well, let's stick with the truth.

[allen farnham (from livejournal.com)]

The following is the email sent to "BrigidsBlest" regarding the review of Angry Ghosts.

Brigid-

I'm truly grateful to anyone who takes the time to read my book. And for your thoughts, I'm doubly grateful. There's no doubt about their sincerity.
Sure, it stings to get a negative review, but it was due me. You raise some good points. I bobbed my head in recognition of the sparse characterization, purple intro. There could have been greater diversity. Better editors likely would have made this a better read. Omniscient present is an odd way to tell a story.
All true.

Without these criticisms, there is no growth.

At times, you seem zealous in your derision. English as a second language...a mistake most writers learn to avoid in elementary school...Turkey City Lexicon entry...a poorly-written Star Trek online RPG chat log.
Ok. That's your opinion. Fine.

But the quest to humiliate goes on so long, the point is labored. It ceases to be a review and becomes a sweeping statement on the evil of self-publishing. Not really pertinent. Makes the reader wonder if you have an axe to grind.

In future reviews, please remember it's appropriate to attack the work, not the author.
And please don't get so lost in your critique that you permit an embarrassing blunder: The word alright is accepted in dialogue. Not the formal body of the text, but dialogue is fine.

Thank you again for taking the time. I mean it!

-Allen Farnham

Keep in mind, this was a private message to Brigid only, but where my character has been called into question I'll let this group decide for itself if I bear a grudge or if I was genuinely grateful for the feedback.

All of the Authonomy comments are on record, should anyone like to see them, though I know I never maligned Brigid in any way. If she does not like the responses to her review...perhaps she should take her own advice.

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

Kevin W. Reardon is a very special author. Or maybe "special" author, given that he seems to be unable to learn from experience. The man must go onto the internet using the short keyboard.

[krmtdfrog.livejournal.com]

Took me a good 10 minutes of google-fu to find that he doesn't even have a full book out, just an excerpt in Fresh Men: New Voices in Gay Fiction, currently on Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,070,403 in Books (lol). I mean, if you're gonna bitch about something, don't you have to at least accomplish something first? At least Rice had maybe earned a tad of rebuttal time (not the way she went about it, but in general), and that Ryk Spoor dude could maybe raise a fist in anger, but this shmoe? Sheesh.

[seawasp]

No, even J.K. Rowling hasn't "earned" rebuttal time in that sense. This is one of the classic Inscrutable Martial Arts Master rules: "If you begin the battle, you have already lost."

I'll reply to negative reviews -- with a variation of "Sorry you didn't like it (or didn't like X feature), but thanks for reading anyway." -- but I'm not going to try to tell them how wrong they are about their own opinion. That's a war you can't win, and you'll look like an idiot for trying. Besides, I can do that on Usenet all the time.

[krmtdfrog.livejournal.com]

Well yea, not in the sense she went about it, like I said... just in a general way.

[guy-jin.livejournal.com]

Anne Rice I can forgive. The rest can go to hell. Or never be published again, which is the same thing for an author.

[seawasp]

Forgive really isn't in the picture; it's not a matter of forgiveness or anything like it in this case, it's just the image that you present of yourself. Anne Rice, to my mind, is a particularly egregious example of the type, however, and I still point and laugh. Even if she didn't MEAN to, she basically came across as not only trying to defend and attack in a situation that called for neither, but also as saying "Ha, I'm too big and powerful to edit and you must KNEEL before my brilliance!".

I'd like to have her sales, but I wouldn't want to get the attitude.

[muirecan.livejournal.com]

Oh good grief. It sounds like Mr. Reardon has a major chip on his shoulder about something. Amazing just amazing isn't it how some people constantly sabotage themselves and then complain about how horrible the world treats them. ::sigh::

[chaotic-nipple.livejournal.com]

Kinda reminds me of the time Tom Kratman showed up on someone's livejournal to bitch about what they'd posted about a panel he was on at a con, and ended up threatening them with UCMJ action for making lawyer jokes (Kratman having been an Army lawyer, the other person having also been in the Army). Alas, that person since deleted their blog for other reasons, but it _was_ both funny and surreal.

[tomkratman.livejournal.com]

Sorry, Nips, but that's not what happened.

A. Could have cared less what he did or didn't like about what I said on a panel at a con.

B. Impuning my personal integrity, in my presence, is...one of two things that make me...well...kinda homocidal. Always good to let people know...and perhaps especially the integrity-challenged, like Sap, or the undiscerning and probably idiotic, like - so far as I can tell - you, not to do this, at least in my presence.

C. There is a difference between telling someone they're in violation of UCMJ and threatening legal action. Ah, but we've already covered that you're not very discerning, haven't we?

I don't know you and, based on the foolish monicker and the icon that is...well...just too cool for words, I'm pretty sure I don't care to. Nonetheless, I suppose even you must be one of God's special treasures, so perhaps this will do you some good.

By the way, for the Army I was not a lawyer; I was an infantry officer, ranger, with some off the wall time spent doing other things here and there. I was a civil, or perhaps occasionally incivil, lawyer outside of the Army.

Y'all have a nice day. Merry Christmas, even.

best,

Tom Kratman