And Kirkus Hates Me
Jul72010
You know, one thing about publishing, it doesn’t feed your ego. Before the glow from the PW review had begun to fade, Kirkus came back to call Maybe This Time ” a charmless romance, neither funny nor scary.” Well, it’s always something. Oh, and if you’re wondering why I’m posting it here, I figure if you’re taking the trip with me, I should show you all the sights. I do object to the “facetious;” I was being perfectly respectful to Henry James and all the other authors I referenced. And I thought it was pretty clear why Andie could see the ghosts, May tells her why she can see the ghosts . . .
Let it go, Jenny, let it go.
WARNING: THERE ARE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.
Crusie (Agnes and the Hitman, 2007, etc.) returns with a romantic comedy cum ghost story with facetious nods to Henry James and Daphne du Maurier.
Ten years ago Andie met, married and divorced love of her life North because he put his Columbus, Ohio, law career ahead of their marriage. Now that she’s engaged to a nice writer, she drops by North’s office to return the years of alimony checks she never cashed. North immediately offers a proposition she convinces herself she can’t refuse: $10,000 if she will spend a month in the wilds of southern Ohio caring for two orphaned children, distant relatives for whom he’s had responsibility since their Aunt May’s death two years earlier. North has only met them once, leaving them in the care of a string of nannies in their creepy Victorian mansion imported from England by the children’s ancestor. As soon as Andie meets the housekeeper, Mrs. Crumb, with her “reptile smile,” she knows she’s in for a challenge. Blonde, waiflike Alice has a violent temper when crossed. Her older brother Carter barely speaks. Immediately, Andie begins to succeed with them where the nannies failed. But then there are ghosts that Andie and the kids see. Two came with the house a century ago and are clearly sinister. They killed Aunt May, whose spirit remains and chats up Andie about North, inadvertently reminding Andie how much she still loves him and not poor Will. Then North’s brother, Southie, arrives with his TV newswoman, who has sniffed out the ghost story and wants to conduct a séance. Actually she wants to expose North for mistreating his wards. Soon North, his mother, Andie’s mother, Andie’s purported fiancé, a medium and a professional ghost skeptic have assembled as storm clouds gather. Now throw a little Agatha Christie into the mix. Why Andie gets to see the ghosts is never clear; nor frankly, why North shouldn’t be charged with neglect.
A charmless romance, neither funny nor scary.
And now moving on . . .
Loading ...
107 Comments to 'And Kirkus Hates Me'
On July 7, 2010 at 4:49 pm Gabriele said...
It seems the reviewer can’t get over the references? Perhaps he’s got some strong opinions about references to literary saints, I don’t know. I wish I could say something to make you feel better… other than “I’ll definitely buy the hardcover”, of course. The word “charmless” just looks so odd in any text about your books.
On July 9, 2010 at 3:17 am Caroline Briggs said...
Well if it makes you feel any better, Henry James always makes me want to throw his books against the wall, and if I ever have the chance to meet Isobel Archer, I’ll be hard-pressed not to smack her and tell her to get a life. So Kirkus needs to broaden their minds a little bit. My academic creds are in good order, so I get to say things like this. I actually READ some of the stuff that’s published as ‘literary fiction’ (not that much of it is actually readable, in my humble opinion, but that’s another rant). As far as I’m concerned, my opinion matters MUCH more than Kirkus’!
On July 7, 2010 at 5:12 pm Electric Landlady said...
Well, I’M still looking forward to it.
(Incidentally, this is one reason I’ll never make a reviewer. I can never outright praise or pan a book, because how do I know what other people like? Rarely am I willing to commit myself past “well, I LOVED it” or conversely “It wasn’t really my thing.”)
On July 7, 2010 at 5:12 pm MJ said...
Poor baby!
Move right on, indeed.
On July 7, 2010 at 5:26 pm monique said...
Kirkus kinda hates all fiction. And considering they have had trouble printing the magazine – when we got our copy – and I saw the review – I thought – isn’t that nice – they are back and as nasty as ever. I would not consider it as big as deal as PW or Booklist. And most non-library folks don’t know what Kirkus is. And we know they are always nasty.
On July 7, 2010 at 5:35 pm KellyJ said...
You couldn’t write something charmless if you tried. Your books helped me through my dad’s heart attack, for crying out loud.
On July 7, 2010 at 5:56 pm Louis said...
Booo..Hiss… to Kirkus.
Keep on writing.
We’re looking forward to readin’ your writin’.
On July 7, 2010 at 5:59 pm kyrathered said...
The reviewer is clearly a douche because s/he didn’t read the book carefully enough to know why Andie could see the ghosts. When they skewered Tell Me Lies over at Smart Bitches/Trashy Books they had actually read the book. A bad review is one thing … this one was SHODDY.
On July 7, 2010 at 8:27 pm Jenny said...
Smart Bitches does very fair reviews. I have a lot of respect for them.
You know, it’s one person’s opinion and you’re never going to get everybody, so you just roll with it.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:19 pm kyrathered said...
I agree you should roll with it, since it is impossible for everyone one on earth to like every one of your books. The poor deluded fools. However, it is easier to roll with a review that was fair minded and clearly explained, as opposed to the half-assed attack by a reviewer who paid little attention. It’s like the one bad review The Unfortunate Miss Fortunes got … where I kept yelling at the screen, “The book wasn’t like that at all you cretinous reviewer!” because the reviewer didn’t grasp the fact the book was written as a whole, not three-in-one. I hate it when they obviously did not really read the book. It is rude. Harumph.
On July 7, 2010 at 6:00 pm kyrathered said...
Also, the reviewer can kiss cherry ass. Grump.
On July 7, 2010 at 6:15 pm Barbara (you don't have to call me Barb) said...
What a difference between the reviews and I’m not talking about whether one is good because the reviewer liked the book…The Kirkus review is just a blow-by-blow recount of plot elements with one short overview sentence of the reviewer’s opinion. Compare that to the Publisher’s Weekly review and you see how much better a writer and reviewer that person is. The PW reviewer did a great job.
But I gotta tell you: I don’t need the PW review to be looking forward to the book and pre-ordering it. I’m already there.
On July 7, 2010 at 6:20 pm JulieB said...
Where’s the “eye-roll” emoticon?
On July 7, 2010 at 6:32 pm Elisha Schnell said...
If it makes you feel any better, it’s seems quite a poorly written review. Most of it is summation with just that little scathing line pasted on at the end. Speaks more about the reviewer than you. I wouldn’t worry about it, it wouldn’t have turned me off as a reader.
On July 7, 2010 at 6:49 pm Allie said...
I actually have some bigger thoughts on this subject that relate to divorce and custody and our strong pull to find ways to distance ourselves from children when we can’t be in their lives every day just to keep ourselves sane, so although I wasn’t crazy about North at first, I did understand that as long as he thought they were cared for he could tell himself he was doing the right thing.
On July 7, 2010 at 8:30 pm Jenny said...
Yeah, he screws up which he admits later. But he did get them nannies and he thought they were living in a good place. And he fixed it in the end. I think the big thing was that he’d never had children, didn’t understand what children need, and didn’t know the kids at all. And when he tried to bring them up to the city they freaked, so he thought he was doing the right thing by leaving them in their home.
On July 7, 2010 at 7:01 pm Renee said...
KIRKUS SCHMURKUS.
If I could give internet raspberries, Kirkus would have a drippy face.
On July 7, 2010 at 7:44 pm marly said...
Everything is subjective, but this review is so far off the mark. All he/she got from Alice at first was that she had a temper? And Carter is relatively silent? I can only think that the reviewer skimmed like a jet ski. Perhaps there was a back-log. Because Alice and Carter were interesting from the first, and then grew and changed into kids that I loved and worried about and wanted to be safe. Screw subjective, this review is terrible.
On July 7, 2010 at 8:00 pm SnarkMaiden said...
and what’s with a review that gives away so much spoilerage and can only fit in a one-line actual comment? that’s not a review – that’s a badly written blurb. bah, I say, bah!
maybe it will cheer you to learn that I nearly incinerated dinner tonight by picking up Wild Ride while I was waiting for the chicken to finish cooking and I didn’t put it down until Ray snuck up on Mab at the fortune teller and I had the urge to wash my hands, which was *way* after the chicken was actually done
On July 7, 2010 at 8:01 pm mindy said...
Meh, I’ll still read it.
On July 7, 2010 at 8:12 pm bernie said...
Well I can say is that review won’t be changing my pre-order of Maybe This Time… and chances are I will loan this one out, not get it back and have to buy myself a new one! What is it about your books, and my Stevie Nicks and Counting Crows cd’s that when I loan them out, I never get them back and then am buying second and third copies? Yes I know, I should learn to stop loaning out… I just can’t help myself.
On July 7, 2010 at 8:31 pm Jenny said...
And we thank you for it.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:23 am Briana said...
Heh. I’ve bought at least 5 copies of Anyone But You and have passed them around without any intention of getting them back.
I think of raising that “people buy only 5 books a year” average like it’s my job to raise it. All with Crusies, apparently.
On July 8, 2010 at 3:17 am Jenny said...
That’s very generous of you. Keep up the good work!
On July 7, 2010 at 8:28 pm Dre said...
Well, I read the excerpt of the first chapter and laughed a couple of times out loud so we have to consider the possiblity that the reviewer is humorless. Funny thing about that, many people without a sense of humor don’t know it and other people write what they think is humor but it isn’t funny. Humor is such a subjective thing and when someone claims something isn’t funny in a declarative sentence, then I always have to consider whether they’re projecting. I can’t wait to read this book.
On July 7, 2010 at 8:46 pm CrankyOtter said...
So should I buy a hardcover and an eBook? I’m not quite sure how to cope with my keeper authors now that I have a nook (so sue me, I went for immediacy).
OTOH, it can’t come out soon enough. A friend just gave me the Steig Larsson books. I’m 160 pages in and I’ve yet to read anything that isn’t infodump of the most eggregious kind. It’s infodump buried in infodump, repeated and cubed. “I can’t infodump this to you until I give you background infodump!” Save me! I’m vaguely intrigued by the girl (with the dragon tattoo and others) who my friend said was a good character. So far, there’s not enough of her. But this is about you. Right.
So they got the references at least. Poor Baby! We’ll help make it a bestseller, not to worry.
On July 7, 2010 at 8:59 pm Merry said...
If it’s the first book, it took me over 200 pages before I got into the plot.
Plus, what’s with every woman with a pulse trying to seduce the hero? I’ve now made it through all 3 books, and it’s gotten to the point where I laugh out loud whenever he gets propositioned.
On July 7, 2010 at 11:40 pm London Mabel said...
EXACTly how I felt.
On July 7, 2010 at 11:28 pm Jenny said...
Buy whatever you want, babe. Or get it out of the library. I’m just grateful you’ll read it.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:24 pm kyrathered said...
FYI — I found my first Cruise at the Library and have bought them all ever since. Cranky Otter (what a fabulous name!) — people (my mother) keep stealing my copies too. You are not alone.
On July 7, 2010 at 8:56 pm Merry said...
I can’t comment on the book, unlike SOME people who keep
boastingmentioning that they read the review copy let it go, Merry, delayed gratification is good for you but I have to agree with Elisha and Marly that the review itself was poorly written. It’s funny how people who can’t write a decent review always take extra care to sound catty, as if that makes up for lack of content.Is AgTig available, or is there another person of the British persuasion around? I always thought “chat up” meant flirt with in BritSpeak, which it doesn’t sound like something the aunt was doing with Andie.
On July 8, 2010 at 2:55 am Laura Vivanco said...
I’m from the UK, and whenever I’ve heard people talking about “chatting someone up” it’s referred to flirting. The online Oxford dictionary says that too.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:25 pm kyrathered said...
I now use the phrase to describe flirting because I am an Anglophile and I live to pretend that I am British. It is possible I am a loony.
On July 8, 2010 at 8:24 pm glee said...
wouldn’t a loony be Canadian? just saying
On July 7, 2010 at 9:30 pm Meredith B. said...
The Booksellers say, ignore Kirkus. They give bad reviews so often that when they do give a good review, we superstitiously start to worry that the book won’t sell. You know, sometimes I want to swear at Kirkus. Strangely, for people who make money off of the book industry, their goal seems to be to make it pretty darned hard for us to sell any books. (Oh, wait– Maybe that’s why they almost went out of business earlier this year!) Part of being a responsible reviewer is recognizing the prospective market of a book and reviewing it in light of that, something that Kirkus has never displayed much of a sense of to me, and this review only solidifies my opinion. Many Kirkus reviews are not actually helpful to many readers and professionals.
In addition, if the reviewer caught the references to other literary works and still didn’t see the depth of MTT, then s/he sure had better not have an actual English degree, or the rest of us will rise up and revoke it. I got to read an ARC, and the bookseller and the B.A. both agree on this one. It’s good, it’s deep, it’s romantic, it’s funny, I think it’s marketable. Try not to worry too much.
On July 7, 2010 at 11:29 pm Jenny said...
Thank you, Meredith. Tell your friends I love them, too.
On July 7, 2010 at 11:36 pm toni said...
I recently read a fabulous piece by my friend and fellow KillerYear alum, Jason Pinter, in Huffington Post about why so many reviews and reviewers are finding themselves irrelevant in today’s culture. It’s insightful: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-pinter/death-of-the-literati-goo_b_627243.html
On July 8, 2010 at 9:16 am Meredith B. said...
Oh, that was a good article, Toni! Thanks!
On July 7, 2010 at 9:50 pm Donna said...
Kirkus kinda reminds me of Mikey in the old Life cereal commercial — they hate everything! (almost)
Back when Amazon.com was just getting started and their featured professional review source was Kirkus, I commented that if they were aiming to reduce sales, they’d certainly hit on the right method . . .
On July 7, 2010 at 10:07 pm AB said...
I know people have already said this, but I have to chime in, one thing that really struck me was how badly the review was written. Not because it was panning the book, I can expect that not everyone will love it (though I fully expect to!) but because it spent too much time outlining the book, with too much detail, and barely any time actually reviewing it. And with some horribly awkward sentance structure to boot!
Merry, In Australia if someone is chatting you up, they are trying to pick you up – that line caught me off guard as well (I actually thought ‘why is the spirit chatting up Andie by talking about North?’).
On July 7, 2010 at 11:30 pm Jenny said...
I think we’ve adopted that usage here, too. At least it means the same thing here, and I’m pretty sure we stole it from you.
On July 7, 2010 at 10:16 pm SusanK said...
Those who can, do; those who can’t, criticize.
On July 7, 2010 at 10:50 pm Reb said...
If it’s any comfort, I read the review’s plot summary, which is most of it, and thought “this book sounds like fun”. So the review made me more inclined to read the book, not less.
On July 7, 2010 at 10:52 pm KellyJ said...
What do they say in When Harry Met Sally? Something like, “Everyone thinks they have great taste and a good sense of humor. But they can’t all possibly have great taste…” Boo Kirkus. Yay Jenny.
On July 7, 2010 at 11:02 pm Christine said...
Tosser. Next…
On July 7, 2010 at 11:13 pm Jade said...
An outrage, I think, but it’s just one opinion.
Agree especially with Gabriele: The word “charmless” just looks so odd in any text about your books.
And with KellyJ: You couldn’t write something charmless if you tried.
Bad Kirkus. They may be the ones who get the “bad review.”
On July 7, 2010 at 11:19 pm Susan said...
Doesn’t Kirkus ultimately hate 99% of the books it reviews? When they reviewed my last one, I didn’t even feel like they had read the book! Chin up and keep that PW one close!
-S.
On July 7, 2010 at 11:34 pm Jenny said...
Oh, I still have Booklist and Library Journal to survive. Then the book comes out and everybody else reviews it.
You have to be sensitive to be a writer. Then when the book is published, you have to have an iron-clad hide. My problem is usually with the sensitivity part, so this isn’t so bad.
On July 7, 2010 at 11:39 pm robena grant said...
So, you’ll give them the finger when it hits the NYT bestseller list. Ignore them, ignore that review, those are just empty words taking up page space. Can’t wait to get my hands on the book.
On July 7, 2010 at 11:46 pm Clever Cherry aka Judy Long said...
I’m not just offended I really don’t understand how your publisher allows that review to be read. Hello spoiler alert before the book is even on the shelf. The person above who says its just a story summation with a criticism at the end is right on. And how can someone be doing a story summation before your book hits the shelves.
I never read reviews or pay attention to them.
I repeat what I’ve said many times. I can’t wait to read the books. For someone to say that anything you wrote is ‘charmless’ is just ridiculous.
To Kirkus I say, bitter much?
On July 7, 2010 at 11:48 pm Clever Cherry aka Judy Long said...
Should read I can’t wait to read the book, not books. I wish I was waiting on books plural of yours to come out in August. I’ve read every one that is in print already.
On July 8, 2010 at 12:10 am Eve said...
I don’t typically write reviews for books caz you know, I’m lazy, but I will now. Those aholes can blow – if there is one thing Crusie books always have it’s charm because your character arcs are always fully developed.
horny, no-sexed, heroin-withdrawal pricks. don’t listen to them, we loved it!
On July 8, 2010 at 12:15 am Eve said...
also, thanks for looking into the merchandise situation. I think I messed up before, I meant to mention both Dogs and Goddesses (beautiful illustration w/three very round women as possible covers who look a bit like vases) and Dogs and Goddesses.
Perhaps, we can have a contest and/or vote for things we would like to see for sale? I’m all for supporting the arts (especially when it brings as much joy as your books do). Seriously, there isn’t a single book that doesn’t have an image and quote stuck in my head and I strongly associate some days with it. Would be much cooler and more appropriate to have the tshirt/hat to go with the sentiment.
THANK YOU!!!!
On July 8, 2010 at 11:01 am Eve said...
omg, I did it again, how embarrassing – what I meant to say was Dogs and Goddesses and The Unfortunate Miss Fortunes.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:00 am Sierra said...
I have to ditto everyone who said that this review was poorly written. In fact, it felt as though the reviewer had issues with the large cast more than anything else – “and then this person, and then THIS person, and why are there more people?!”
They probably would have been happier if you’d written something that was a nod to Waiting For Godot. “I only have two people to keep track of? Thank God! But who’s this third character? They’re never introduced..”
Blame it on their apparently lacking short term memory and possible general crankiness. I’ve never regretted reading one of your books, and have read most of them into crumbling oblivion. Or I’ve given them away in an effort to share the wealth of Crusie books. I have no doubt you explained everything that needed to be explained, because you always do. I’m never left wanting anything from your writing, except for possibly more of it, and I’m looking forward to ignoring the world the day that my copy of MTT shows up. It’s pre-ordered and on my calendar.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:03 am Sierra said...
Also, I didn’t know which ghosts were evil or that Aunt May’s death was their fault until this review. If you’d mentioned it here, I’d forgotten it. If you hadn’t, shame on the reviewer for spoiling that for possible readers.
On July 8, 2010 at 3:17 am Jenny said...
I know. I should probably take it down because of the spoilers. Somebody on Amazon gave away the whole plot including the ending. Idiots everywhere.
On July 8, 2010 at 3:30 pm toni said...
Can you get the Amazon one taken down for that? I’d heard that you could, if they gave away everything. I seem to recall having to have one pulled on book 2 for the same reason, but my memory is crap.
On July 8, 2010 at 3:57 pm Jenny said...
I just got a note from Amazon saying the spoiler e-mail is coming down. Big points for Amazon.
On July 8, 2010 at 3:19 am Jenny said...
I just put in a spoiler warning. Thank you, Sierra.
On July 8, 2010 at 3:38 am Jenyfer Matthews said...
That review didn’t put me off at all – obviously read the book against their will.
Unfortunately for me, even if I preorder the book I will be back in Egypt by the time it’s actually released, which means I’d have to wait to have it in hand until next summer anyway (SOB) But I’ll be keeping an eye on digital possibilities. I have been limping along with my ancient ereader (which I love dearly) but I may have to break down and get a Kindle just for situations like these. Getting mail sent to Egypt just isn’t worth the expense and effort when you can never be sure it will actually arrive…
On July 8, 2010 at 9:06 am Meredith B. said...
An ereader is a great idea, but international copyright laws apply to ebooks too, so make sure that you can purchase the files from where you are, or else that you set up an account in the States that someone else can manage for you. I’ll explain: I have a friend in the armed forces who has a Nook (which is similar to the Kindle.) But because different publishers have the rights to publish a given ebook in different countries, she can’t actually buy the ebook files from an American publisher while her IP address says that she’s in Germany, where she’s stationed. So she set up an account at barnesandnoble.com which her sister manages for her, and whenever she wants to buy a new file she gives her sister the information, the sister purchases the ebook using my friend’s account, and then my friend is able to download the file onto her ereader. Confusing enough? But it works out really well for them.
On July 8, 2010 at 9:56 am Bonnie C said...
That is a brilliant workaround!
On July 8, 2010 at 4:57 pm Kira said...
I live in Israel and haven’t had any problems with Kindle books.
On July 8, 2010 at 8:38 pm SnarkMaiden said...
this is because publisher pay writers x to publish in their territory and 20 or 30 xs around the world add up (it might be x, y=x/5 and so on); if the publisher wanted worldwide rights they would offer much less than 30x for it. so while it’s inconvenient for readers, it keeps writers solvent to have multiple territory rights.
On July 8, 2010 at 10:01 pm Meredith B. said...
I’m not saying it’s a bad thing, SnarkMaiden. It does make perfect sense in the light of International Copyright laws, and it all definitely helps authors, agents, retailers and even readers (eventually, in the economic trickle-down sense) a whole lot. But it isn’t something that your average book consumer would necessarily expect to encounter.
You know what my problem is? I’m trying to prevent consumer dissatisfaction before it occurs. I can’t turn my inner bookseller off. Darn it. I’m off the clock.
On July 8, 2010 at 11:10 pm Jenny said...
“World rights” doesn’t even mean you’d have only one publisher, it just means that the publisher gets the right to sell to the other countries and then it keeps half the money and applies the rest to your advance from them. Eventually when the book earns out, you split the foreign royalities with the publisher. If your agent has a good foreign rights department, it always pays to keep world rights and sell only North American unless the publisher is paying through the nose for them. And even then, your agent is probably going to do a snappier job with the world rights.
On July 8, 2010 at 8:14 pm Allie said...
A friend of mine is spending a year teaching in Korea and he said the Kindle was the best thing he brought with him, hands down.
On July 8, 2010 at 8:30 am Naked Under My Clothes said...
Man, someone got paid for that review? How do I get that job? I promise I’d actually approach the books from a place of respect and then READ THEM before sharing information that readers might find USEFUL.
On July 8, 2010 at 9:05 am Lynn said...
Reviews are only one person’s opinion (yes, I know, it’s easy for me to say).
I rarely use Kirkus for a review resource when buying books, we don’t even subscribe to it in the library. They were on the verge of closing a few months ago and just barely escaped.
Look forward to Library Journal and Booklist … especially since PW liked it.
On July 8, 2010 at 9:24 am McB said...
You know, it just sounds snotty. It’s not a critique; it’s indigestion or something and he’s (she?) projecting.
Merry, I’ve never believed that whole delayed gratification thing anyway. Which is why when I get my hands on a highly anticipated new book I close myself away somewhere and devour it in one sitting.
On July 8, 2010 at 10:04 am Bonnie C said...
I don’t typically read reviews (unless I find them on the author’s blog
) because there are only a handful of people whose opinions on what I should read/watch that actually matter to me and none of them are “reviewers”. Except maybe the Smart Bitches. They never fail to entertain, but even as they eviscerate a story they don’t connect with, they always tell you WHY. Often, it makes me pick up that book to see if I agree – I’m kind of perverse that way.
I’m envisioning a dart board with this review pasted on it and lots of margaritas when the NYT bestseller list comes out with MTT positioned in a spot of honor.
On July 8, 2010 at 10:32 am Mary Stella said...
I’d suggest we review the reviewer’s writing in complete detail, but he/she is so boring that we’d off ourselves like the people in Airplane.
I’ll still buy and read the book. Since we don’t have any big bookstores in town that are likely to carry the book, I won’t be able to wait until I go to the mainland. I’ll download it on the Kindle, but will still want a hardcover copy because it’s a Crusie. So, I’ll end up buying it twice.
You’re worth it.
On July 8, 2010 at 8:31 pm glee said...
Ditto — although I do already live on the mainland
On July 8, 2010 at 11:02 am Jo Walton said...
A few years ago, Kirkus instituted a policy where self-published authors could pay $300 to be reviewed by them. I asked my editor if I could pay $300 to avoid being reviewed by them, because they always hate me.
PW are a classy magazine. Kirkus… well.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:08 pm Diane L. said...
As has already been mentioned, Kirkus hates almost everything good and their reviews are, as in this case, often just plot summaries. Of course here they went above and beyond and included spoilers too. If you get a good review in Library Journal, no librarian will not buy your book for the collection based on Kirkus, guaranteed.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:12 pm Brandy said...
I rarely take not of “professional” reviews, preferring reader reviews. (Especially since I write them myself, for fun.) However, you? Are an auto-buy. Charmless? Was the reviewer describing him/herself? I’m looking forward to Maybe This Time, it releases on my Birthday and the hubs has orders to wrap it with a bow. *G*
On July 8, 2010 at 1:12 pm Brandy said...
Ack, take NOTE.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:28 pm me said...
That’s not a review, it’s a synopsis. And not even a good one. It reads like the book was just skimmed, along with seven other books the same day, because the reviewer had a quota of reviews to turn in all at the same time.
I surely wouldn’t pay $300 for a Kirkus review, that, based on the comments here, would be a bad review.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:28 pm Jessie said...
Our library must not read reviews on authors that are frequently checked out because I have had MTT on hold for at least two months, waiting for it to be released and I looked up the number they ordered and they ordered 20 – so much for waiting for a book to be reviewed.
On July 8, 2010 at 1:29 pm kyrathered said...
Do you think Kirkus attacked because you write Romance, and are thus a damn scribbling woman who must be maligned?
On July 8, 2010 at 3:54 pm Jenny said...
No, they’ve given me good reviews in the past.
The thing to remember about reviews is that they’re the opinion of one person who could be anybody who likes or dislikes your book for any reason. So if you hit somebody on a bad day or somebody who doesn’t like the kind of thing you write or somebody who is anti-romance, you can end up with a bad review and all you can do is shrug and move on. I wouldn’t have posted it here except that having made such a big ta-da about the PW review, I thought it was only fair to show the Kirkus, too, and not cherry-pick the good stuff.
On July 9, 2010 at 7:20 am Naked Under My Clothes said...
Deny it all you want, but Argh Ink is a class operation, and this is why.
On July 8, 2010 at 2:30 pm Sara said...
First time poster but I’m a huge fan. Just had to let you know I just read the Booklist review. You will not be disappointed.
On July 8, 2010 at 3:55 pm Jenny said...
Sara, you are tease. But thank you. That’ll get half of my fingernails out of the ceiling.
On July 8, 2010 at 4:00 pm Sara said...
Don’t want a bad reputation! Let me just say, there was a star involved and the following:
Maybe This Time.
Crusie, Jennifer (author).
Sept. 2010. 352p. St. Martin’s, hardcover, $24.99 (9780312303785).
REVIEW. First published July, 2010 (Booklist).
The plan did not include ghosts, or working, even temporarily, for her ex-husband, North Archer. The plan was for Andromeda “Andie” Miller to march into North’s law office, return a decade’s worth of uncashed alimony checks, and depart to begin her bright new romantic future with writer Will Spenser. But somehow Andie ends up taking care of North’s two young wards. The kids have already gone through three nannies, one of whom claimed Archer House is haunted, but Andie figures she can manage for a month. Until she starts seeing ghosts herself. Six years after her last solo effort, Bet Me (2004), RITA Award-winning Crusie triumphantly returns with a bewitching tale. Graced with deliciously original characters (including a housekeeper who could give Mrs. Danvers a run for her money), imbued with addictively acerbic wit, driven by a wildly inventive, paranormal-flavored plot that offers a subtle literary nod to Henry James, and featuring two protagonists who just might get their romance right the second time around, Maybe This Time is Crusie at her very best.
— John Charles
On July 8, 2010 at 5:13 pm Jenny said...
I e-mailed my editor and former agent and Meg found it. We must have posted simultaneously. Thank you so much for telling me because I wouldn’t have asked them for it without you.
On July 8, 2010 at 2:51 pm riye said...
That review is like some art show reviews–mostly description and very little honest analysis. That’s lazy and unhelpful. And just because they threw Henry James in there doesn’t make it literary. At least they didn’t get personal. I got interviewed once for an art show and the reviewer started out by telling me how surprised she was that I looked normal. Um, thanks!
On July 8, 2010 at 3:24 pm Deborah Blake said...
Well, f*ck ‘em, I say. I’ve had reviews where people said “I don’t understand why…” when is clearly explained in the book. Those reviews DON’T COUNT. Phooey on them.
On July 8, 2010 at 3:32 pm Deb Z. said...
In college we used to say, “F*** ‘em if they can’t take a joke.” Not everyone’s going to get it but it doesn’t make you or your book any less. Your devoted fan base won’t let you down, just like you don’t let us down.
On July 8, 2010 at 4:02 pm doris in munich said...
Is Kirkus always that unrefined in it`s reviews? It reads more like a schoollike summary to me than a literary review which ought not give away spoilers but give direaction about the quality of the reviewed book and the fun/callenge/thought provoking content (whatever seems striking) it provides for the reader with a minimum of summary.
Well, even a badly written review when not getting the point hurts. The PW-reviewer obviously had more skill in her/his job, so try to imitate one of your dogs after getting wet: shake well and concentrate on enjoying the PW review!
On July 8, 2010 at 4:04 pm doris in munich said...
Sorry about the many typos in my last post – it was a long day and my thoughts don’t seem to get along with my typing fingers.
Sleep well – she says from a dark and cozily warm Bavarian night
On July 8, 2010 at 5:02 pm Lora said...
Well now that we know their opinion we can all just cancel our preorders and wait for something Kirkus deems worthwhile. Excuse me but asshatedness brings out my inner sarcastic bitch and these snooty dorks really got me wound up. Yup, your detractors are, in fact, SNOOTY DORKS!
On July 8, 2010 at 9:14 pm Deborah Blake said...
ANd, of course, I’m buying it anyway. Morons.
On July 8, 2010 at 9:55 pm Ami said...
Still gonna read it…
On July 8, 2010 at 11:05 pm Julia Tasker said...
Fairly certain the reviewer does not know the meaning of the word facetious. Aside from that they appear able to summarize but offer little in the way of insight or interest. Plus the spoilery (not a word, I know) nature of the review is just plain rude. And if the person who wrote it doesn’t get funny from a Crusie book, then I’m thinking- lobotomized.
On July 9, 2010 at 8:27 pm Janice said...
Off topic: I wanted to know what movies are coming up on http://www.popcorndialogues.com / twitter #popD. Where would I find the list?
On July 10, 2010 at 9:09 am Jenny said...
It’s on the “Now Playing” page at the PopD blog.
On July 9, 2010 at 11:20 pm Kelly S said...
Saw a tweet today and thought of this posting. Tweeted by @DonLinn
“Er. No. RT @LaurelSnyder: Doesn’t anyone anywhere subscribe to Kirkus?”
On July 9, 2010 at 11:27 pm pennyoz said...
Does it really matter? What’s most important is that I love you and could you want more than that?
NEVAAAAH!
Pennyoz
On July 10, 2010 at 6:45 am AgTigress said...
Coming a bit late to this. First, I agree that that is a sloppy review (and as others have confirmed, ‘chat up’ always means ‘to flirt; to attempt to pick someone up’, so makes no sense whatever as used. Indeed, it really jolts the reader who understands its meaning).
I do wonder whether the reviewer is more accustomed to reviewing non-fiction, and indeed, whether he/she is not even very used to reading novels? Reviewing practice for non-fiction, whether academic or popular, is very different from fiction reviewing. In fact, when I first started looking at reviews of contemporary fiction, I was bewildered by terms like ‘spoiler’, and the apparent determination of both writers and readers to keep the end of the story a well-guarded secret! I always look at the end of a book before I buy it, anyway. Doesn’t stop me buying and reading it if I like the author and the style. And ‘knowing how it ends’ doesn’t stop me, or anyone else, from re-reading an enjoyable book again and again .
If someone writes a scholarly tome purporting to prove that the first Neolithic immigrants to Britain came from China (I’m trying to think of a loony theory that hasn’t actually occurred to anyone yet), the meat of that theory, the conclusion of the argument, will not only be spelt out in the blurb and in all the reviews: it will be the main selling-point of the book. Nobody will review it by describing part of the argument and then saying, in effect, ‘you’ll never guess what the author concludes from this! Read it and find out…’. What the good non-fiction reviewer does is to summarise the contents of the book, including the conclusions, comment on the effectiveness of the thinking, the argument and the writing, mention something that he particularly likes (‘I found the 74 detailed distribution maps especially helpful’) and usually, make a couple of criticisms (‘Bloggs seems to be unaware of Bagwash 2002, which addresses this issue’, or ‘minor misprints on pages 14, 83, 214 and 389 should be corrected in any future edition’).
The Kirkus review seems to me to be planned as though for non-fiction, rather than fiction, where the rules are different, so it is totally ‘off’ from the start. And it is badly written anyway. Ignore it.
On July 10, 2010 at 9:18 am Jenny said...
The spoiler thing, for me, is about violating the experience of the first read.
I try to design the books in two layers. The first one is for the first read which is the one that’s like an amusement park ride. You want the story to swoop around curves and take people’s breath away with surprise and reversal, you want them to read to find out what happens next because it can be so exhilarating. But then there’s the second layer they get when they read it the second time, when they know what’s going to happen so they can slow down and see the other stuff, watch the subplots develop, see all the foreshadowing they missed because they didn’t know what was going to happen, start to pick up rhythms and motifs and notice little things that are stuck in there like Easter eggs for the reader making the return trip. If I’ve done it right, readers should still be discovering new things on the third or fourth read. So reading with knowledge of the plot shouldn’t destroy a book, but it does destroy that first ride. And it’s unnecessary. You don’t have to give away the plot of a book to tell reader’s what it’s about and why it’s good or bad. That’s just lazy reviewing.
On July 10, 2010 at 9:40 am AgTigress said...
Yes, what you say about the first read makes sense. A well-written novel will keep on revealing new layers. I still find new things in books I know very, very well, books that I first read decades ago.
Anyway, I think that the Kirkus review clearly violates the widely observed rules for fiction reviewing, and is poorly expressed into the bargain. Sucks to it!
On July 10, 2010 at 3:27 pm Tawna Fenske said...
Aw, hell. Having read the book already, I disagree 110% with the criticisms voiced here, and I’ll keep that in mind when I post my own review of it next month.
In the meantime, would you like me to beat up the reviewer? Really, I’m quite skilled with a pipe wrench.
In all seriousness, I’m already cringing at the thought that I will inevitably see reviews like this when my own debut hits shelves in Aug. 2011. I can’t decide if I’ll deliberately avoid reading them, or if it would be more mature for me to accept they’re out there & try to learn from them. I seldom vote in favor of the mature approach, but I guess I’ve got a year to decide.
Anyway, I’m glad you’re taking it in stride. Rest assured, there will be many, MANY of us who love the living crap out of this book.
Tawna
On July 11, 2010 at 6:07 pm Pam said...
I say, tell Kirkus to bite me. You could right grocery lists and I’d read em’ and laugh my butt off.
On July 28, 2010 at 2:57 pm Barbara Martin said...
Actually, apart from the reviewer’s comments about their dislike of the story, the paragraph outlining what went on during the story really appealed to me. I’m sure most people who read the Kirkus review would be able to realize there is a great story waiting to be read. I can see it.
On September 11, 2010 at 2:34 am Jane said...
Take it from a librarian – Kirkus hates everyone. Well, mainly authors of adult fiction and children’s literature, which is why public librarians – who really have the pulse of what readers want and are looking for, rarely refer to Kirkus when making collection selections. Come to think of it I really don’t know who puts much stock or value in what Kirkus says. Ignore them.