Tag Archives: reviewing

LiteraryMinded’s fifth blog anniversary spectacular! (part four)

Posted on by
2

Amy Espeseth asks: ‘Has/how has your fiction writing changed since you started LiteraryMinded?’ and John (Musings of a Literary Dilettante) asks: ‘how has reviewing books helped your own creative writing?’

Five years of regular writing—fiction and nonfiction—has made me a better writer. I hope I keep getting better. Five years of reading, close reading and reviewing, has definitely helped. All the books I read make me want to do better. Some books also help me realise my limitations, ie. I’m really no good at simile, unlike Deborah Forster or Ryan O’Neill. I also can’t write something uproariously funny, but I can write something a little absurd. Many authors have helped me pay attention to detail, to fill out characters and their worlds, to make them real. I’ve learnt that there really are no rules, either! And I’ve learnt this not just from reviewing, but from attending festivals. Every writer has a different method. There is no one way you should write a story or a book. I’m still learning about plot, drive and pace. I do think I learn something new with every book I review.

I’m near the end of the third draft of a novel manuscript and I know it’s ten times better than the last one. But will it be ‘the one’? Who knows. Short stories are much harder than they used to be. But I think that’s because I’ve been putting so much energy into the longer work. Or maybe it’s because they really are so damn hard to get right!

Amra Pajalic asks: ‘What was your most controversial post and why?
How has having a blog helped you establish yourself professionally, especially as a reviewer?’

I don’t even want to revisit controversial posts. It may be a giant flaw but I really find it difficult to deal with conflict. I’m diplomatic about it when it happens, but I’d rather avoid it altogether. What a wuss! Most of the controversial stuff happened when I was on Crikey. Some of the commenters could be nasty, but I think they often came via the website expecting something specific (and receiving something else—a personalised blog post). A post about the launch of a certain anthology of Australian literature and another around a certain literary prize were the most controversial.

The blog, combined with my work at Bookseller+Publisher, are the reason I am now reviewing for a wide range of media. The blog is also the reason I get invited to literary events, so yes, it has definitely helped me to establish myself professionally.

Alexandra Neill asks: ‘During the zombie apocalypse you are only allowed to bring one book (you need to carry a lot of canned goods). What book would you take with you to the end of the world?’

(Because dogs make me smile, no matter what.)

Bethanie Blanchard asks: ’Who has been the most surprising person you’ve interviewed (differing perhaps from your expectations)? What is the best piece of advice about literary blogging and / or reviewing you’ve received?’

I don’t think anyone I’ve interviewed has really surprised me, but there have been a few times when I’ve met someone and realised I’d had expectations about them that were based on nothing at all. For example, when I met critic Geordie Williamson (and I hope he giggles if he sees this) I thought he was going to be an old man. I don’t even know why, his reviews aren’t particularly ‘old’, I think I had a kind of ‘book critic’ stereotype in my head. I first met him at PWF and found that his skin was wrinkle-free, his cheeks rosy and his demeanour affable.

As for advice on reviewing, let’s turn to that young man Geordie Williamson and his excellent Pascall Prize acceptance speech on ‘open-handed criticism’.

Michelle (BooktotheFuture) asks: ‘In honour of your fifth bloggiversary—do you have a memory from when you were five years old (or around that age) that you can share with us?’

Little Robbie. A very small boy with black hair and freckles. He had more Ninja Turtles toys than me and I was jealous. He could do the moonwalk and in class he would whisper: ‘hey Angela, hey Angela’ and I’d look over and he’d have his doodle out.

Susan Wyndham asks: ‘What do you know now that you didn’t know when you started the blog?’

That the Australian literary community is so generous and welcoming. That writing is even harder than I thought. That scholarships and grants exist. That whisky has many different flavours.

Brian Purcell asks: ‘What was the second-best writers festival you’ve appeared at? (The Bellingen Readers and Writers Festival naturally being the best).’

The Ubud Writers and Readers Festival, which I’ve been to twice. Besides the stimulating panels and gorgeous setting, you get to mix with writers from all around the world at some incredible parties. The locals are lovely, the food is delicious and the booze is cheap, too. And Perth Writers Festival is one of my favourite festivals to go to in Australia. The UWA Campus is a great setting and they treat their guests very well.

mareelouise asks: ‘In all this time, is there one book that you could call your favourite?’

Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii-iiiiiiit that’s hard. It depends on my mood! Right now I’m going to say Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita.

Luke Stickels asks: ‘As a hard-eyed veteran, are there any qualities to your blogging that have dropped off from when you were starting out, but that you kind of miss?’

Well, I was a lot less guarded. I was living in Coffs Harbour and didn’t really know anyone personally who read my blog. Sometimes I wish I could write some of those posts about being lonely or feeling afraid or thinking everything is f**ked-up… BUT I think I realised it’s more fruitful (for me) to channel those thoughts into fiction (and even reviews). I also realised that other people were writing about those kinds of things more articulately than I. So I guess I don’t miss it too much. But I think some readers dropped off when I became more ‘serious’ (though still, I hope at times, absurd) but others were gained. The core remains the same, the expression has changed.

Oslo Davis asks (and illustrates): ‘Where do you stand on ebooks? (Literary):

Love your work, Oslo. You know, I’ve read quite a lot of short stories as ebooks (and published some) but not novels. I think that’s mainly because, as a reader, I like to dog-ear and notate. I also read several things at once and sometimes only remember to pick them up because the books are sitting there staring at me. You don’t get that with an ereader. So I don’t mind ebooks, but I seem to still predominantly be a dead-tree media reader.

Mark Welker asks: ‘Single biggest change in your life derived from starting your blog?’

Becoming a professional book reviewer! And I love it.

Mel Campbell asks: ‘Well—ARE you the Keymaster?’

No, I am Zuul, the minion of Gozer. I am the Gatekeeper!

—

Still enough qs for a part five! See you again soon…

 

Sending out your books for review: a few tips

Posted on by
6

I’m a very lucky person. I receive several books in the mail each week and several more offers via email. There are a lot of books being published every day, and many that interest me or that I think would interest the readers of this blog.

Literary editors, freelance reviewers, magazine and journal editors, and other literary bloggers would be in a similar position, some receiving many more books and enquiries than myself. I’m writing this post on their behalf, as well as for my own benefit.

If you’re an author, publicist, small publisher – someone who is trying to get your book/s to an intermediary who may influence sales or opinion – please read the following tips:

1. Target your niche. Never assume that your book is just ‘perfect for everyone’. Read the publications you are offering it to and get a feel for their main audience. I will often ignore emails from people who obviously have not read LiteraryMinded.

2. Address your email to the right person. Don’t send out a blanket email. Attaching a press release is fine, but address the blogger/literary editor and tell them why you think they/their audience would enjoy the book.

3. Provide information about the book. This seems like a no-brainer, but some emails I get just tell me the title of the book and don’t provide any information or links. If I’m extremely busy I might not have time to google around and see what I can find out.

4. Don’t over-hype the book. Think about the fact that every day we have emails in our inbox that say ‘the most amazing book of the year’, ‘spellbinding’, ‘a must-read’, ’the next [insert famous author]‘ and so on. We are not impressed. We know you love the book – but we end up ignoring a lot of that stuff.

5. One follow-up email is fine. We may have forgotten about or missed your earlier email. But if you email several times you seem desperate and unprofessional. That’s a cold hard fact. We get hundreds of emails a day. Do you want to turn us off? Most publicists know this but authors will often email me several times asking if I’ve gotten to the book and if I’m going to review it. I have told them I will try and that should be enough. Sometimes when I don’t review it I’m actually doing them a favour…

6. On that note: remember that we might not like your book. Not all mentions are good mentions (another reason why targeting the right publications makes sense).

7. If we say we are too busy and just have too many books to deal with at the moment, we probably mean it.

8. Try and remember that some of us are doing this for love, not money, and don’t expect too much. We have other things in our lives: other jobs, our own writing, relationships, and of course – a pile of classics we haven’t gotten to yet. Be kind, be patient. We do our best.

9. All that said, do email us with offers. Or send your books through the mail with an attached press release and follow up once via email. Do bring things to our attention. We love books. We adore them. And we don’t always have time to go through your catalogues so it does mean a lot to us when you find something that is just perfect and suggest it, tactfully, to us.

Here’s an example of one email offer I accepted:

Hi Angela, I just wanted to see if you would be interested in receiving a copy of the new book WILD UNREST: Charlotte Perkins Gilman and the Making of “The Yellow Wall-Paper” …especially in light of the 150th anniversary of Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s life. -[name withheld]

In WILD UNREST (Oxford | November 2010) author Helen Lefkowitz Horowitz offers a vivid portrait of Gilman, drawing new connections between Charlotte’s life and work. Horowitz discusses how Gilman’s famous short story “The Yellow Wall-Paper” drew on the writer’s own experiences with mental illness. Horowitz uses numerous primary sources to investigate the piece, including revisiting: Gilman’s journals and letters, the diaries of her husband Walter Stetson, and the published work of S. Weir Mitchell, whose rest cure dominated the treatment of female “hysteria” in late 19th century America. The author argues that these sources reveal that Gilman’s “Yellow Wall-Paper” actually emerged more from emotions rooted in the confinement and tensions of her marriage than from distress following the prescription of Mitchell’s rest cure.

The subject matter shows the publicist is familiar with the blog and some of my interests (literature, mental illness, feminism). It is addressed directly to me. It is friendly without being pushy. The publicist has included enough information about the book but has not weighed down the email with overblown hype about the book – the description speaks for itself.

I hope these tips are useful. I may come back and add more or refine later. In the meantime, if you’re a literary editor, reviewer or blogger who gets lots of offers and would like to add something, please leave it in the comments below.

Let's Have a Conversation

Posted on by
16

Good-weekend lit-lovelies,

Check out the crowd in the reading room! You can view some more pictures from The Death Mook launch here. This was absolutely the highlight of my week. I had to have a few wines before reading to deal with the nerves, damn them, and because there was such a big crowd! Dion and Lisa sold over 100 copies of the book on the night. It was absolutely grand. My next publications are in Wet Ink and an anthology from the Remix My Lit project, both fiction.

Here are some TITbits for this week:

* There are a few days left to be considered for 15 Minutes of Fame at the Emerging Writers’ Festival. See last week’s round-up for the details.

* Submissions are also now open for the National Young Writers’ Festival, held in Newcastle in October. Click here.

* How did you go with Chris Currie’s ‘secret celebrity writers’ month’ during February on Furious Horses? Could you guess which of the stories was mine?

* Okay, I’m insanely jealous of the comment streams going on at Stephen Romei’s ALR blog. I am contributing, because I do often contribute comments to blogs I enjoy, when I have something I’d like to say. And there is a fresh bunch of varied comments from all sorts of people, excitedly agreeing and disagreeing. Now, last week I had over 2000 people here (*waves*) and I wonder… am I not being provocative enough? Or is it the Crikey system? See, it’s very, very easy to comment at the ALR blog. Here, it is easy as well, but it requires a name and email (for WordPress, not Crikey). Hum. I know many of you have something to say because you write to me. But see one of the great aspects of a comment stream is talking to each other. I will give this some serious thought as to how I can encourage you further. Cookies? Bookmarks? Free books?

Anyway, here’s how I responded to Romei’s post on what makes a good book review (and I was responding to a specific set of questions he asked in the post):

Oh how I love this post. I come to this from many angles – as a fiction writer, a reader, a reviewer (in blog and print form), and a proofreader/editor of reviews at my work.

First of all, what I like in a review is insight and honesty. I want someone to tell me, honestly (and it’s always going to be at least partly subjective due to our past collective of cultural influences, and our personality) what they thought of the book, and then I want them to give me insight into why. And this insight is an intellectual insight – from someone who is truly passionate and interested in the workings of literature. The reviews in ALR are usually ones that I enjoy very much, as they do provide these elements.

I think it should be clear whether or not the reviewer liked the book, because if it isn’t (if it’s vague), I sometimes suspect other agendas (not pissing off an advertiser/publisher/author etc.). And if I read a few of a reviewer’s pieces and share the same interests I will go to them again and take their word for it. In order for a reviewer to build up trust with their own readers, they really must be honest and insightful, and not just write press releases or pooh-pooh books for the sake of seeming ‘clever’. Though a genuine, honest, and insightful damning review can make very entertaining reading! I do think they might find some way to provide some direction or suggestion (insight again) on how the author might improve…?

The reviewer should never reveal crucial plot points, especially endings.

It can be interesting to alert readers to the author’s other books, if it’s relevant to the book being reviewed. But the ‘focus’ of the review should be the book in question. It may be useful to compare it to works of the author’s contemporaries in that it acts as a guide for the reader – if they like such-and-such, they may also enjoy this one. I don’t know about unfairly stacking authors of different genres against each other or anything like that though.

I do indeed expect ALR reviews to be different in style and substance than those in the weekend pages. I also think reviews on blogs and websites can be approached differently (and not necessarilly quality-wise) but I’m saving this discussion for a blog post of my own… something I’ve been thinking about a lot!

And your last question – yes there are some reviewers/essayists I will always read, and some I will deliberately avoid (such as a couple in Aus Book Review who always seem to be on their high horse, and really don’t give me much accessible insight into anything). There are also whole publications/websites/blogs whose reviews I avoid because they don’t have the honesty/insight which I see as essential.

* I have been living in Melbourne one year tomorrow. The UNESCO City of Literature. I love this place.

* Upcoming on the blog… lots of reviews! I have about five in draft stage at the moment. Plus an interview with Eva Hornung (formerly Sallis) about her new novel Dog Boy; Charlotte Wood’s literary space; another ‘small-town notes’ letter from my taxi call-centre friend; an original poem by Geoff Lemon; and the piece mentioned above that I’m writing about successful cultural blogging, and how it differs from reviewing for print media…