Friday, 20 January 2012

My response:

The problem is that blogging and the wide worlds of the internet have changed the world of reviewing as well. I understand that there are “actual reviews” without bias or any of the snark, but the internet has literally changed the face of what reviews are to readers (or the audience). I do not write a snarky blog post (book review entry) for myself or to be a jerk. I’ll be honest, I’m writing it for others and to give them something to snort about (and so readers can know my experience with a certain book). Snark is in, but it does not dictate a blog-reviewer’s posts. We have something substantial to say as well.

It’s the same for movies, you know; take Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB. The fact of the matter is, bloggers and online commentary, in the mainstream (including snarky blog posts) are a lot more successful and recognized than “reviews”. I realize that reviews are for the readers, but they’re not exactly useful when barely anyone has access to them or is reading them. 

I respect this short blurb on the reviewer/blogger-author relationship, but it isn’t so black and white. That isn’t to say some bloggers/reviewers are not rude about it, but you cannot mom everyone and you certainly cannot say that they deserve what they get “because they were asking for it”. That’s like saying “oh, that girl is wearing a teeny-tiny top. Maybe she wants me to force her into sex. She’s asking for it.” 

Bloggers need to take responsibility as well, but authors need to understand that they cannot tell people what and how to think either.

So I agree with Maggie, but I also disagree that the definition of review is so resolute in the world of today.

#maggie    #stiefvater    #goodreads    #good    #reads    #gr    #draqma    #drama    #reviews    #bloggers    #reviewers    #definition    #my    #response    #books    #book