IMO- Authors in Reader Spaces

This is the first installment of a new blog series IMO-In My Opinion. In this series, I will try my best to dissect bookish discourse and maybe give a reason why it is cyclical.

Today's post is Authors in Reader Spaces...

Honestly, I thought this topic would be an easy one. I mean, we've collectively agreed that authors should stay out of reader spaces. But, somehow the discourse continues to happen. The quickest assessment of why it keeps happening is, it isn't always the same debate, but we are using the same rationale.

PAUSE: Before I go too far into my explanation, I want to say that this blog post is not excusing the behavior of authors that send their readers to silence readers/reviewers or participate in harmful behavior i.e. stalking or doxing readers/reviewers. 

First thing, Reviews are for readers YES, but where are the designated reader spaces???? 

💡GoodReads/StoryGraph/Readerly/Amazon, etc.

I think where it gets a bit more complicated is the next set of questions...

1. When reviews are posted should they remain in the designated space? 
2. What is the decorum for authors who coexist in reader spaces? 
3. Are authors considered readers? When can they take off their author hat off and put on their reader hat?

The easy answer here is author should not engage with reviews. But I think why we continue to have this discourse is the cross-pollination into social media. When reviews travel to "open" spaces like Twitter/TikTok/IG it muddies the water of where reviews are seen and authors occupy the same space as readers.

PAUSE: I'm not suggesting that you can't/shouldn't post reviews on your social media accounts. Your platform your rules.

What I am saying is social media is intended for engagement so posting reviews there creates an opportunity for retweeting/sharing that's different than say a GoodReads review. Then the matters may get even more complicated particularly when an author is tagged. Authors with the strictest no contact with reviews rule can inadvertently engage in some form of impeding on reader space once they are tagged. So big picture reviews are for readers but the reader space is a mystical ever expanding and dare I say fluid space. Now, what?

In my assessment readers truly hold the power to define the reader space. Therefore, placing authors in a precarious position to infringe on this fluid space when they rebut a review whether it is their own or that of a colleague/friend. Coupled with there is no standard expectation for rating/reviews. The free labor of reader reviews for better or worse comes with the territory of this art form, books WILL be critiqued. 

The benefit and curse of social media is ACCESS to the person and their thoughts/reactions. An author airing their frustration publicly feels like an indictment on ALL readers/reviews. But a reader/reviewer sharing their experience with an author interacting with a review is a warning (x author was unreasonable or unhinged). Either way, the odds are not the same and I think authors have to have some boundaries. Reviews come with the territory so I think authors should consider 

• How should you express your frustration about reviews?
• What interactions do you want with readers on social media?
• I think it might even be prudent to have a protocol for reading negative reviews. 

***I have no advice here other than to say it's necessary to think through these things before you are on the list of authors behaving badly. And, yes the reader whisper network is a necessary tool, particularly for readers/reviewers of color who are often pushed out of reader spaces for calling in/out authors for problematic content. ***Actually I wonder if having a shortlist of trusted reviewers could help???

Now, I do think in good faith the vast majority of authors understand the concept of staying out of reader spaces. So while authors can also be readers, IMO your author-ness ALWAYS trumps your reader side so it might be good practice to keep thoughts private rather than public facing UNLESS you are okay with pushback. Or maybe a better way of saying it is, are you willing to bet your reputation on a singular review? Choose your adventure in that case. Also, reviews are subjective. Hello, 3 stars is low will always be lost on me but I digress. Reviews serve a purpose and readers are looking for specific things i.e. did anyone else pick up on X or am I tripping, who else can I gush about this book with, etc. The last point here on the subjectivity of reviews, readers cannot always discern the author's individual beliefs vs the character. The quiet part is there is some room to have unconscious bias and I think this is where reviews REALLY are crucial to signal to other readers. 

For these reasons, I think the discourse while annoying, will continue to happen especially when you layer in tone policing, 3-stars are bad (they are not), did you even read the book, etc. the discussion becomes a convoluted mess. I wonder if the real culprit here is the expectation around reviews. Movie and food critics for the most part opinions are respected but it's not the same for book readers/reviewers. However, readers/reviewers are important to the ecosystem.  

Closing thought, I worry a lot about reviewers feeling they cannot honestly review for fear of author interactions and/or toxic readership, which is another very real element of this broader conversation. What happens when other readers, fans, and readership start to weigh in? Should I do a Part 2: Reviewers Calling Out Reviews?

Check out other readers/creators who recently weighed in on this topic. 

💚Reviewers should stop making their timeline author-heavy and vice versa…it’s a conflict of interest imo pic.twitter.com/oUkw2nEEy6

— Fun•Mi (@_FunmilovesHEAS) December 20, 2022

 

💚MynamesisMarines a recap 

@mynameismarines

a recap on Piper CJ and a reminder that negative reviews are not for authors.

♬ original sound - Mari - booktok + media reviews

💚Authors in Reviewer spaces YouTube discussion [Bethany, Marines, Mara, and Rachel]

Happy Reading!