Black Balled
Yes, i have read it, and it may come as a shock to some people, i didn't like it, regardless the hype.My review will stand, for as long as it will be allowed before i get escorted to the gallows.
Opinions are important, they make us who we are. But to expect the entire world to abide by our opinions, makes us morons. Andrea Smith - if the shoe fits, please feel free to lace that bitch up and wear it... I didn't get very far with this book. From page one something didn't quite fit. It was too close to real life in some points, and so full of rage to be simply disregarded. Goodreads became Greatreads in this novel and there are numerous examples of conversations, very similar to a GR thread.
Take bestsellers for an example - Harry Potter and Game of Thrones. Those are epic novels, made legends by the entertainment industry. They've made so much money, the authors descendants will have tiny dollar signs embedded in their DNA for generations to come. So please, take a look at their reviews. Yes, they have one star reviews with the rest of them. See, tastes differ.
It's becoming increasingly common practice to label a person intellectually inferior because they don't agree with what we say. I don't mean only on the internet, either. Sad, since quite the opposite is true. Now here is something that is so readily available to people, in fact i think everyone has shared it from time to time. To bad it's become an cliche witch people parrot without truly thinking about it.
*cliche, yes i know - but couldn't be more fitting*
Andrea Smith may think her writing is amazing, Graysen Blue may think her stories topple the mountains and boil the seas with their originality. Other people may disagree, and they are allowed to. Black Balled says so much about the author, and yet so little about the reviewer she tried to belittle. Once you get a few chapters in, it's abundantly clear that L. Blackburn is an emotional mirror. “He” addresses problems of Indie publishing, saying how it's so very hard to get an audience since there is so many self-pubs out there, and half of then not nearly as good as him. His talent gets lost witho all the riffraff. At one point even refers to himself as, “I know I’m good, and it sure as hell doesn't take a genius to realize that!” ….really? Hear that people? You don't like this, you're a retard.
In the original book blurb, you know the erased one, we see the indie author going head to head with someone who tired to 'destroy their career'. Over one single review.... Wow. The author can't have very good opinion of their work if it's success can be measured in the like or dislike of one single person. So that tells me the story is weak.
In the book, however “Babu” the reviewer is described as a sanctimonious, arrogant prick who treats his following and his job like shit. More or less, he says that people who read his column would believe anything he says. Because they are simply that stupid. Smith described him tormenting the author by sending him a film in witch he had a whore spit his cum on the cover of the author's book (my... don't we have a flair for the melodramatic?), then proceed to mail it to him from his sock puppet account. Because that's what every well paid (six figures I believe) professional does. You know – puts his reputation on the line like that from a sock account, that he naturally has. - That is her view of people who dared to trash hers, no wait, Blackburn's work....sorry I got confused for a moment. Oh, and all this buhaha about this completely fictional, and having nothing to do with real events. Judge the book, they've said...Wow, did the book write itself? I'm amazed....well maybe the book stole some information and framed the author. I mean there must be a defense, any defense. It simply CANNOT BE THAT THIS BOOK IS BAD. It must be someone else's fault if it all went south. Not the author's - cuz she speshul n stuff....
The paper trail Smith left made me cringe. To use a pen name - leave a fabulous review as yourself, to go and announce on Amazon - It's one and the same person - without thinking people will connect the dots. Especially those who have been affected by the product. I will be honest and say I was amazed by that. It's so simple, transparent, unimaginative, uncreative, and downright stupid. So that part tells me not to expect any 'Didn't see that one coming' moments in her work.
Lastly - i will address this bullshit like cardinal rules and whatnot. THERE ARE NO RULES! There are preferences dictated by common sense and courtesy to your fellow reviewer, as another member of the human race. I personally was on the receiving end of hate mail many times. Mostly by reviewers, and once by an author. Why? Because I didn't like the same things they did, or I didn't conduct myself well enough to fit their standards. I was slapped in the face with imagined snobbery where I was told that if i want to consider myself a serious reviewer, I shouldn't say things like shit and review a book I didn't finish. And we have come to the core of the problem - CONSIDER MYSELF.
People like that, who CONSIDER THEMSELVES to be an authority in our little reviewing world grate on my nerves, and honestly make me want to punch their lights out. Even if you are working for the world's leading magazines, or publishers, your opinion is still the one of a single individual. 90% of people here just like to read. Simple as that. They should be viewed as potential customers and fans. Not like this. To write, or to read for enjoyment is a sign of passion, a sign of creation and discovery. So many different stories, so many different genres and tastes. How the hell are people SURPRISED that somebody might think differently? Or not like the things you do.
For an author to step out and spit on somebody who had a taste of their work is degrading to the author. Furthermore to launch a revenge on the person for having their own taste is pitiful. Andrea Smith considered herself a better author than she was, she considered herself righteous, and attacked her reader from an imagined moral high ground when really she should have taken in her own actions. If she simply left her private animosity out of it, i can guarantee her work would have found an audience. Even a small one, because it always does. Like this, she gave her would be readers insight in how narrow and limited her imagination truly is.
Yes, her career is in the shitter, but it's not the reviewer's fault. In the end it was proven that one voice didn't have nearly as much impact as her ugly actions. Who would want to read one of her books to be called names if they didn't like what they saw? Seriously, there are so many books out there, so many authors that would be grateful for your time, and take any criticism as a constructive tool, rather than throwing a tantrum like a spoiled brat. Fuck this.
No, not the reviewer, the fault is her own. Poetic justice for a prosaic crime.... she deal't herself the hangman.
