Apparently It’s OK To Bash Category Romance Readers, But Not Fans Of Fifty Shades Of Grey…
Monday, July 2, 2012Posted in: Adventures with Blog people
Tags:AAR, AAR Sandy, Hypocrisy
I guess the majority of you will have heard about AAR Sandy’s slightly hypocritical blog post by now?
To be fair, I agreed with the majority of her post. That is, until I read the following:
» I am sick of all the 50 Shades of Grey bashing. This is especially ironic when it’s clear that the bashers haven’t read the book. I am certainly not saying that the book is great, but it’s at least a B- to me. And, as I wrote before, there is something fresh there that I haven’t read in a while. Bashing the book makes other authors look small and I am tired of reading it on Twitter
» I am sick of all the bashing of 50 Shades of Grey readers. What gives anyone the right to judge a reader for a book she likes? I am sick of the vicious remarks I’ve read on Twitter, but the casual swipes are also getting to me. And on that subject…
» I have moved past the Harlequin love and I am mystified by serious readers who haven’t. I get that there are some good and maybe even great authors working in that genre, but, for the most part, they are formulaic novels that are, in fact, written to formula. I understand how they could be a guilty pleasure and a comfort, but to wank on and on about how great they are as literature? Here’s what I think: If all the Harlequin lovers were subjected to the stuff that is regularly aimed at 50 readers, the sputtering outrage would be off the charts. But, you know what it comes down to for me? I liked, but didn’t love 50. I once liked, but now don’t love Harlequins. Wouldn’t it be nice if everyone could respect each other and coexist peacefully? I won’t read the Harlequin reviews or the message board threads and it would be nice if the anti-50 people would do the same.
What I don’t get is how she thought she could write about being tired of Fifty readers getting bashed, and then turn around and bash category readers?
Of course, I expect that deep down she knows that she totally contradicted herself, she just doesn’t want to admit it.
It’s not like I care whether or not category readers or Fifty readers get bashed, as far as I’m concerned, it’s all fair game, but it strikes me as a tad disingenuous to have a go at people having a go at Fifty, then turn around and do the same to other readers’ of books that she apparently can’t relate to.
Mind you, reading the following comment from Sandy helped clarify things a little more for me:
I was also the target of a wanky (yes, I think that word applies) DA post recently and I undoubtedly will be again. So it goes. I don’t recall anyone taking the poster to task for being impolite.
So this post was really all about having a swipe at Dear Author, because of a perceived slight from a DA contributor? Well, why didn’t she just say so in the first place? I totally understand swipe-back posts, I do them often enough myself – the difference being, I’m not backwards in coming forwards when it comes to naming names.
Poor Sandy, despite her protestations to the contrary, she so knows that she came off as a hypocrite. If she’d just said admitted it, this conversation would have died on the same day the post went up. Hmmm…or maybe that was her evil plan all along, to keep ’em talking? Bwahahaha…
Mireya
July 2
12:27 pm
She’s so smart that according to the zis-boom-bah aka cheerleading brigade of hers, “she was trying to prove a point”? R-i-g-h-t … I don’t read category, I just recently started visiting that blog… and her attempt at proving whatever it is that she alleges she was trying to prove keeps flying right over my head. The part I love best is how the captain of the cheerleaders pretty much implies that those that can’t understand what elusive point is that, is because they don’t get her (Sandy), so I guess I “ain’t” special/intelligent enough to read that blog… whatever. The funny part is that all I thought about that post was that it was a rant and that as all rants go, it probably wasn’t thought out thoroughly before hitting that “post” or “send” button. *shrugs*
Karen Scott
July 2
12:41 pm
Mireya, the cheerleaders made me laugh out loud no end, with their sycophantic “Sandy, they just don’t get it” mantra. Lol, nobody was saying that she couldn’t have her opinion, they were merely pointing out how contradictory and hypocritical those two paragraphs sat side by side were.
We all know that she knows, that what she posted was indeed hypocritical, she just doesn’t want to own up to the fact, which I understand fully, seeing as I rarely back down, even if I have a suspicion that I may be in the wrong, which for the sake of clarification, rarely happens:)
Anne
July 2
1:39 pm
I don’t get the AAR vs Dear Author/Blogs thing. As someone fairly new to the community, is there some history there of which I’m unaware? That post Sandy linked to (the rape in romance one that she said targeted her) seemed perfectly innocuous to me. I mean, they disagreed with what she said, sure, but so what? If you put your thoughts out there on a blog for everyone to read, it’s the same as opening them up for a debate, isn’t it? Or have I gone crazy?
Las
July 2
1:52 pm
Anne, while I’ve known of AAR forever I never paid much attention to their message boards, and I came to notice the blogs after they’d been around a while, so I don’t know much of the story. From what I’ve gathered, Jane and some some others from DA, and possibly Sarah from SB(?), were members of the AAR boards, and there was some animosity there, I think. Eventually they formed their own blogs, became big, and the AAR crowd, which was the biggest name in town back then, grew resentful of the blogs’ success. If you spend anytime at AAR you’ll notice that blogs get mentioned with some derision. You’ll also notice how they constantly feel the need to mention how they were the first, how groundbreaking they were in the world of romance reviews, etc., etc.
Las
July 2
1:57 pm
Nothing annoys me more than people playing stupid, which is exactly what Sandy’s doing in those comments. And that point she proved that she’s so proud of? Saying something that’s meant to piss people off, and having those people get pissed off, is not a skill, it’s basic pattern recognition. She did what any three year old does when she says a bad word to get a reaction out of mommy.
Mireya
July 2
2:28 pm
@Karen Scott: I know! she just kept going and going in circles repeating the same thing, every single time she posted in that thread. Reminded me of a wound up toy or the Energizer bunny that keeps going and going and going and going… you get the gist.
Jane
July 2
5:16 pm
I guess I’ll speak to the AAR v. the rest of the world of blogs thing. When I started DA in 2006, I did it because I thought blogging was cool, not because I wanted to diminish AAR. AAR was ground breaking. It was forward thinking, allowing for a critical voice for romance. It wasn’t the first, of course. The first was The Romance Reader. Laurie Gold was a reviewer there and she left to found AAR. There were also a number of blogs around that time like Rosario’s, Maili’s old blog, SuperLibrarian. There were a few others.
When I first started blogging at DA, I still actively participated in the message boards at AAR. There was a huge change in AAR”s message boards in 2008? or so and I didn’t like the change of format and pretty much stopped commenting there.
I have only criticized AAR about three times at Dear Author. Once was during the change in message boards; second was when Laurie Gold was upset with some bloggers using DIK in their blog name; and I guess, third, was when Robin posted her piece disagreeing with Leigh’s posts about rape in romance. Of all of those posts, probably the one where Laurie Gold was upset with some bloggers using DIK was the only time DA invited any one to bash AAR and it wasn’t even AAR, it was Laurie Gold who held a position I felt wasn’t right.
How AAR came to hate on DA so much, I really don’t know. It surprises me the level of vitriol in the message boards toward us, particularly by readers with whom I’ve had absolutely no truck with or engaged in any kind in the past.
AAR was a formative and lively place in the mid 90s and early 2000s. I went there daily for a long while but it no longer serves my needs. I don’t know why Sandy holds DA with such hostility. We pretty much put our heads down and put out our own content. I’ll admit to not paying much attention to AAR these days and maybe that’s my greatest sin?
Willaful
July 2
5:16 pm
It’s especially hilarious because Harlequins get *so much shit*. They’re the symbol of everything that’s ridiculous in romance. (Often deservedly.) That was so obviously a swipe at DA and SB because they review Harlequins.
Willaful
July 2
5:19 pm
@Jane: I believe Sandy is grouping together a few people she finds insulting and blaming DA for their existence because they post comments there.
Karen Scott
July 2
5:37 pm
I still contend that there’s a lot of bitterness from the AAR PTB due to the fact that Dear Author is arguably seen as a more credible source for romance related news and reviews. The fact that they get quoted by noteworthy news sources has got to bite them a little bit. Although many of us don’t view them in the same light, I bet the AAR crew feel like they’re on the outside looking in quite a lot. It probably doesn’t help that they are viewed by some as pearl clutchers.
Sandy can deny this till the cows come home, but that sense of being second best (maybe even third best) must burn her a tiny bit.
Jane
July 2
5:44 pm
@Willaful: Oh well. Umm. Hmmm. LOL.
Las
July 2
6:36 pm
@Karen Scott: As much as I generally loath the “they’re just jealous” excuse, that really is the impression I’ve gotten from AAR over the years.
Karen Scott
July 2
7:10 pm
@Las: I don’t use the “They’re just jealous” accusation often, but in this case I think it’s probably accurate.
Meri
July 3
5:03 am
My experience has been that AAR, and Sandy specifically, are just not receptive to any comments that aren’t of the “you’re so right/great/incredible/whatever” variety. A few months ago they asked for feedback on the site, and anyone who said anything remotely critical was either ignored or shot down. So I’m not surprised to see Sandy reacting so defensively in the comments this time; it’s not unusual. I was surprised when she stated, in the comments of that older post, that AAR’s goal is not to generate content. What is your goal, then? Because Jane is right – AAR used to be groundbreaking, and it’s sad to see what’s going on there now.
I never understood the anti-blog sentiment on AAR, or why their management does nothing to discourage it (and at times actively encourages it). It’s one of the main reasons I not really there anymore – I didn’t like the negativity and the unwillingness to engage with the rest of the romance community.
KT Grant
July 3
10:10 am
Can someone explain to me why there may or may not be such jealous from AAR toward DA? Both sites work for the same goal, to promote authors and the love of the romance genre. Both get equal respect from the authors and the community also. They also get ARCS or review copies, so it can’t be that either.
When I reviewed for AAR 5 years ago, they were very concerned,or should I say, obsessed with being the top review blog or what have you. IMO, they were the first online source for romance book reviews and discussion back in the late 90’s and early 2000’s when I was just starting to go on the internet. Now times have change with the rise of so many other review sites, blogs etc.
I don’t understand this jealousy and it’s not just from AAR. Book review bloggers do it also. Why? Do they think they’re going to get some multi-million dollar deal from some corporation that wants to buy their blog and feels their competition from other blogs or sites out there?
Also when you think of the romance genre, you think of Harlequin. Why would anyone make fun of those who enjoy reading those books? As for bashing Fifty Shades, give me a break! Once a book is available for public consumption the consumer has the right to say what they want as many times as they want and why would I judge, especially since this poorly written Twilight fan fiction with an emo, I want to smack the hero who has no real bedroom skills to speak of has taken over every waking moment of the publishing and media industry?
Dawn Brookes
July 3
1:22 pm
Yep, somewhat hypocritical. I confess that I haven’t read 50 Shades, but having read all the hoohaa, I’m tempted – not because I think it’s any good (for crying out loud, all the dialogue that’s been quoted is so trite/shite!). I’m morbidly fascinated by it all.
I’m ticked off though by all the publications that are calling FSoG mummy porn. Because it’s got sex (even though it’s shite) it’s porn.
I’m not afraid to say that I love a lot of Mills & Boon/Harlequins. Yeah, some of it crap, but it’s a guilty pleasure of mine.
Lynnd
July 3
8:55 pm
@Karen Scott: IMO, I think that they are just trying to generate traffic to their blog. I believe that I read some comments that their blog was boring when they were trying to revamp their site and draw more traffice. Maybe this is how they’re trying to do it. It seems that lots of other bloggers are talking about it, so it has some effect. At the end of the day, I don’t think it’s going to help them though – Sandy has not only instulted many readers (serious or not), she has publicly bashed one of the site’s advertisers – that’s not good business. Maybe instead of taking swipes at sites that many romance readers like and trust (such as DA), they should try to become more relevant to the community and give people a real reason to visit.
Anon 76
July 3
9:12 pm
I freely admit I’ve not read 50 SoG, only snippets on the net. I don’t twitter, so no idea about the dynamics of how that works and the fascination some people hold for it.
What I do know is the snippets I read of 50 reminded me of satire rather than an actual stand alone book. Kind of like a “Weird Al Yankovich” version of Michael Jackson’s “Beat It.”
Weird Al’s version didn’t make me upset. He knew his work for what it was and that’s what he planned. Did it many times with other artists’ work. It was fun, it was folly, it was “groundbreaking” and genius at the time. Some people asked him to do a satire on their songs.
The difference. It was all in the attitude and attribution.
Lynnd
July 3
9:37 pm
@Lynnd: Sorry for the typos – fingers aren’t communicating well with the brain today.
Beverly
July 3
10:04 pm
@Mireya: The captain of the cheerleaders is xina, who has made it clear for years that she absolutely hates DA/SBTB and other blogs like them.
Anne
July 4
10:55 am
Ah, Xina. Always so kind and welcoming to people from DA who comment on AAR posts.
Anne
July 4
2:46 pm
Hmn. Think I might have been in a bad mood when I posted this morning. Sorry, everyone. Didn’t mean to lower the tone.
Anon 76
July 4
4:41 pm
Okay, I just read through all the comments on likesbooks.
Well not all, I stopped in my tracks at this one posted on July 1st by PatH AAR. If I was wavering in any way about AAR and current staff based on reading and forming my own opinion, well, no more.
Quoting one of Pat’s bullet points:
“* I’ve always seen category romance as the training ground for new authors and a way for mid-listers to remain in business. So categories seem to be a fairly uneven group, which is what eclectic readers like.”
To me, this is like writing a scathing comment on the net then slapping an LOL after it to make the author of the comment less open to criticism.
That bullet point is pretty darn blatant in that first sentence.
Throwmearope
July 4
5:41 pm
I like the term “pearl clutchers” a lot, sums up AAR fairly well. This was my first time back at AAR since Laurie left, I think.
I used to lurk there a ton, but now, I never think of the site at all.
As for Fifty, not bashing it, but not reading it either.