Just this past week I've particularly felt the "feet in
both camps" nature of being both a reader and writer as a site
ironically named GRBullies started receiving attention. This site
collects the personal information of various readers who use Goodreads
(addresses, photographs) in, it claims, an attempt to name and shame
bullies who harass authors on Goodreads. This
site greatly resembles (and also alludes to) an earlier incident where an
author had posted a similar collection of information on her blog about a
reader (Google "Selection Debacle" for further information).
The end result of that incident was the reader – someone who had posted
a very measured, balanced review (of a book which wasn't even the
attacking author's book) – stopped using Goodreads for some time.
Links to the GRBullies site have been appearing on various
writer forums I read, often followed by a mix of comments from people who
have no problem with Goodreads, and people who call it a cess pit. I've
also been watching the discussion direct on Goodreads, because the people named
on GRBullies…? Most of them are readers whose reviews I've been following
for the past year or so.
I can't claim to have a thorough knowledge of everything which
happens on Goodreads, so I can only state what I've observed about the experience
of being an author there:
As an author:
*- There is an emphasis that the site is for readers to track
their books and discuss them. There are opportunities as an author
to promote, but they are within strict boundaries to prevent promotion from
becoming intrusive. There is a clear message to me that this is reader territory,
not author territory.
*- I'm not actively notified of new ratings and
reviews, though if I want to read them I can track them down via an author
dashboard which shows me total numbers.
*- I have a little over 700 ratings (nearly 200
of which include text commentary), which range from 1 star to 5 star.
*- No-one has called me names. Not
everyone has liked my books. Some have said what didn't work for
them in a blunt or snarktastic manner. Not everyone is polite, or coats
their opinion of my writing in syrup, but I have never felt even remotely bullied.
*- The Goodreads administration discourages
authors from commenting on their own reviews – a pop-up message appears
warning you off when you start, though it still permits you to comment.
Occasionally there have been incidents which I have watched from
the sidelines. The majority of these have involved comments
appearing on a review which amounted to "your opinion, you have it
wrong".
This is where "territory" is triggered. Everyone's
perception of a book is different. There are many popular books
which one person will love and another will think is dull or boring or
sexist. The review is their own
personal opinion of a book, their 'mental territory'.
Comments on reviews, even comments which disagree with the
review, aren't automatically treated as bad. A comment phrased as
"I didn't react to that character's treatment in that way, and so
ended up liking the book a great deal more
than you did. Do you think the author was trying to deliberately
comment on prejudice there?" is a relatively neutral engagement in a
conversation while "You're reading it wrong; are you blind?"
will be received as an attack, not an engagement to discussion.
Many comments like the latter result in other readers defending
the reviewer's right to have their own reaction to the book, even if it doesn't
conform to the commenter's. Sometimes the exchanges escalate and (given that Goodreads has such an enormous number
of users) sometimes matters will descend to name-calling. Some
name-calling comes from inexperienced users, who are often corrected by
community members. Sometimes the name-calling stands and matters
escalate further. Usually the dissenting commenter is repeatedly
told to go write their own review rather than argue with the first
reader's opinion in the first reader's 'territory'.
Who is the bully here? The person insisting someone's
personal reaction to a book is wrong, or various connected readers quick
to defend the territory of reader opinions?
One particular point of contention which has developed over the
past year is the use of "author behaving badly" shelves to keep
track of authors who have engaged in arguments with reader opinion. As
an author I would feel tremendously uncomfortable finding myself on one of
those shelves! So far I've managed to avoid it by remembering three
simple points:
*- Goodreads is a place for readers to express their opinions
about books.
*- Not everyone will have the same opinion,
even about my favourite books in the whole world.
*- If I respect other people's opinions, they
will generally accord me the same courtesy.
There are more than a million people using Goodreads. They
all have their own views on how polite they need to be when expressing
their opinions. I may occasionally be a little blunt expressing my
own. But one thing I always manage to remember is that my opinion is only absolutely
correct to me – and people are not bullies for insisting they be allowed
to have their own.
