Review Group discussion
Advice
>
KIRKUS REVIEW - Authors Beware
date
newest »
newest »
The review Jaime refers to is here: https://cms.kirkusreviews.com/book-re...Jamie, are you objecting to the reading level of the review or its content?
As an aside, I'm not a fan of the idea that purchasing a review means that it has to be a good review - that puts the integrity of the whole review process in question.
Jaime, I do focus on small errors in my own (free) reviews and critiques and always have done, largely because I appreciate it when people illustrate inconsistencies in my work - a good critique should enable you to improve. While, if you were watching a film, a continuity error wouldn't necessarily rob the movie of its power (if it had power), repeated errors do affect people's impressions of a product. So, honestly, I'd want to hear about the piddly typos and date discrepancy. On the other hand, it's easier to swallow critique from a trusted source. If the critique itself is badly written or shows a glancing relationship to my text, I admit I tend to feel more aggrieved.
I agree the summation of your plot wasn't great, but re: positivity, I'd have less respect for Kirkus (or any reviewer) if all their reviews were positive. It would make them virtually meaningless - and effectively lock any doors.
Jaime, I've deleted your identical thread on this subject so the section doesn't get too cluttered.
Thanks !I hope other Indie authors benefit from my comments.
Ouch, is all I can say, but it wasn't all bad. Thing is, he didn't completely chop it to pieces and the things he mentioned could be easily fixed if you choose.For the money you paid though, I appreciate your frustration.
A hard, expensive lesson to learn, but as you say, one that others will hopefully benefit from. The lesson is - if you've got $450, spend it on proofreaders rather than KIRKUS.
Jaime wrote: "Good feedback !"It's always been my policy to be more lenient of typos and such for indie authors. Mentioning typos should just be done out of courtesy, but never as a review critique, unless we're talking consistent, glaring grammar and punctuation errors. And in that case, if one really wanted to help the author --and future readers -- one would decline to review prior to a good edit/proofread. I lose respect for "name" book reviewers (and similar script coverage services) for not doing that. I also never "slam" content. For films I use a 100 point scale, and 3 of the 4 films I've reviewed have scored A's, "Resident Evil Pt 6" alone was an F, but I recommended other films in the series (and that story is mainstream, not indie.) For books my rating system is more intuitive, but covers at least 10 points.
In sum, when I have a bit more time, I'd love to peruse your book Jaime. As a writer/artist I could at least give some pointers, and if I love it I'll offer a fair, thorough review too, one informed by the history of the form(s) you're using and the challenges imposed by that. (I might need to ask a few stylistic questions.) You can see I've rated over 100 fiction/nonfiction/art books here, to an avg. score of 4.0, and I don't bother listing stuff I feel is less than a 3 -- life is too short for that, lol.
Ah, I see out of 22 lines, the "reviewer" managed one usable line: "Nichols handles the sequential art skillfully" but then the further criticisms more than take that back, making for some sour wine. Same with the concluding line. The Kirkus review does indeed read like a grade-school book report/summary for a mere check-mark from teacher.
I've received two Kirkus Reviews--one for a non-fiction book I wrote under my real name, and I actually won the indie book award in my category for the award that Kirkus runs. Yet, for my debut novel, which I wrote under a pen name, I got a disappointing, unusable review. For the money I paid, I was also disappointed by what felt like an approach that was not very conscientious.The service is not set up well AT ALL for series. I got slammed for having a hero who was lacking in flaws. Yet, the first book was told from the heroine's perspective, and the heroine herself repeatedly notes that he seems too perfect and may be concealing things from her. The second book is intended to be a big reveal about the hero's character, and it is told from his point of view. If there had been a way to take the second book into account, it would have been clearer that my decision to tell his story later was a structural/editorial decision--not a lack of attention to craft. I would have taken the feedback that I left the reader in the lurch for too long by structuring it that way, but the idea that I wrote a one-dimensional character simply isn't accurate.
The lesson I learned is to never submit part of a series that can't stand alone for a professional review. Even within this review group, I think series sometimes get short shrift and I've suggested that we consider doing a series review group (impossible logistics--I know).
I didn't think your review was scathing (I just read it). Though, I do agree that it wasn't terribly useful. I have read other complaints that the Kirkus Reviews are too heavy on plot summary and not heavy enough on strengths and weaknesses and I agree with that. I've also noticed that a great many poorly-written books from mainstream publishing houses always seem to get favorable reviews. Add in the monolithic paragraph instead of a well-structured commentary, and, yeah, for $450, they can do a lot better than that.
Kilby wrote: "The service is not set up well AT ALL for series. I got slammed for having a hero who was lacking in flaws. Yet, the first book was told from the heroine's perspective, and the heroine herself repeatedly notes that he seems too perfect and may be concealing things from her. The second book is intended to be a big reveal....but the idea that I wrote a one-dimensional character simply isn't accurate. "Yup, I've read similar skimmed-over "reviews" from script services who charge the same as the one in question. One even just spit-out a summary of the plot in oversimplified sentences that went from monotonous, to sarcastic, to slam-poetry (think Mike Myers in that Frisco murder comedy then the slam version of that by Jonah Hill in "22 Jump Street") and that got a sign-off from his boss who refused to offer a 2nd review? Figure 3 hours time to read with quick notes, another 30 minutes to fact-check, then 30 minutes for the write up, and that's $100 per hour. Then that's likely split 75/25 with the (pit)boss, but even then you'd expect beginning teacher/para-educator skill for $25 per hour--and not having to deal with screaming kids, lol makes for zero distractions to boot.
Kilby : This is very good input and feedback.S.W. : DITTO
No matter if you pay for a review or not it should still be unbiased. I for one LOVE Kirkus, Publishers Weekly and Shelf Awareness reviews. If I see a starred review from Kirkus or Publisher's weekly then I know it's going to be good. I do think that Publisher's Weekly's reviews are MOSTLY plot summaries with a sentence or two review wise, which I hate. As a reader though, I have trusted blogger friends whose opinions I trust over some literary magazines. Both will make me look at a book, but bloggers that I know are the opinions I trust best.Shameless mini plug here that I am accepting review requests on my blog https://devouringbooks2017.wordpress.com
I don't know if this is the right thread to ask my questions but I was wondering how many other authors have been inundated with offers of reviews once they mention they are seeking reviewers through a Goodreads posst. I have received several and without fail they do not put links to where I can see the genres they review or they say they are backlogged but if I pay them I can get a quick review.
I would be very careful. I recommend you look at the outfits that professionally reviewed Sonora PASS.
Thank you Jaime. I thought some were dodgy.
I am gratified and grateful for the Readers' favorite awards for SONORA PASShttps://readersfavorite.com/book-revi...
Sonora Pass
Sheesh.