Seanan McGuire (seanan_mcguire) wrote,
Seanan McGuire
seanan_mcguire

  • Mood:
  • Music:

The terrible intimacy of @.

I love reviews the way that I love snakes. I am glad that the world is full of them; I enjoy the company of a great many of them; I have been a snake keeper and I studied snakes in school; I do not particularly feel like snuggling up to every snake on the planet, thanks. Many of them have sharp fangs, deadly venom, and little fondness for hugs. While a bitey review won't kill me, I don't feel like hugging them, either. But—and this is important—I am genuinely glad that they exist. The only way to have something universally well-reviewed is to make that thing out of calorie-free vegan zero-cruelty Wonka Fudge that magically changes to taste like whatever it is you love best in all the world, and even then, I bet one person would pan it on the basis of "this has no personal integrity."

Negative and critical reviews are essential. They make people think about what they're consuming. They provide necessary information that a glowing review might skip over in favor of going "yay yay yay" a lot. They matter. Now, that doesn't mean I'm going to link them, because this is my space, and it doesn't mean I'm going to wander into the terrifying depths of the Amazon rabbit hole, where "this book contained the letter 'c'" is considered a legit reason to pan something. I have a vague sense of self-preservation, and while I may be glad those reviews are out there, I'm not going to go seeking them out.

But here is the thing. Many people @-check me on Twitter. "Just finished the new @seananmcguire," or "Wow candy corn @seananmcguire must be thrilled." And this is great, this lets me talk to people and see who's talking about what. I enjoy the closeness of conversation engendered by use of the @ system. Except...

Except some people seem to forget that the people you @-check can actually see what you're saying about them, because you're saying it to them. I've had to stop clicking review links on Twitter, because there are two conventions colliding when someone @-checks me on a negative review: the Twitter social contract, which says that "Thank you!" and other interaction is appropriate, and the writer/reviewer social contract, which says that I will not engage with a negative review in any space. I don't really want to thank people for negative reviews. It seems disingenuous. I also don't want to get flagged as an "attack author" for saying "Well, I'm sorry you felt that way" whenever someone links me to their one-star take down of my latest work. But at the same time, I feel like I was invited to the conversation; after all, including my Twitter handle guarantees that you'll show up in my feed.

I actually spend a lot of time feeling faintly awkward and unsure, because people will @ me the weirdest things. Someone decided to tell me via Twitter that they felt like one of my books had been phoned-in. Um. I'm sorry you feel that way? But I have no place in this conversation. Everyone's feelings about media are valid, period. Everyone has the right to like or dislike things, even problematic things, and not need to defend themselves. But there's a big difference between a negative review, or a conversation to which I am not invited, and walking up to me and announcing "I hate your work." I am not allowed to respond in any substantive way. It's not my place. I don't get to dictate how you feel about a thing. So it winds up feeling attack-y, in a way that a simple bad review does not.

I think it's important to remember that when you @-check a person, you are inviting them to the conversation, and you may consequentially be inviting them to respond. They have been tagged; they are a part of the discussion now. And it's a little unfair to invite them in if you know they're not allowed to join. It hurts.

I am powerless before the terrible intimacy of @.
Tags: contemplation, technology
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 103 comments
Previous
← Ctrl ← Alt
Next
Ctrl → Alt →
Ouch, I had no idea the "@" symbol could create such a predicament.
It's awkward.
I just started using twitter as well, so this is definitely a good thing to remember. I just assumed that anything with the @Skeletor sign is akin to shouting, 'Hey you! Your stuff is __.' at Skeletor while walking by him on the street. It is a unidirectional generation of noise, and when that noise is negative, I'm sorry. When it's positive though, I imagine that must be still exhausting, but lovely. I think you and anyone else using social media so consistently and with such depth should be freakin' applauded for managing with such grace, no less, the sheer scope and volume of noise levelled at you every day!
Aw, thank you!
YES IMPORTANT! And easy to forget. I never @ authors now unless we have had previous discussions about how they want to see my review (this happened like once) even if the review is positive. It feel really pushy otherwise.
I can see that.
Snakes... Why did it have to be snakes?
Ssssssssssss.
A variation of this happened to me a few weeks ago. I wrote an analysis of whether Outlander by Diana Gabaldon, which is currently being adapted for Starz, would work as a TV show. As a fan of the books, I'm hopeful that it will, but I can see a few potential problems. It got Tweeted by an Outlander fan page, along with my Twitter handle, and for about a day and a half afterwards I was fending off outraged fans. Most of the comments were confined to my blog, but some of the nastier ones did @-check me on Twitter. I didn't respond. I figured discretion was the better part of valor, in that case.

If I post reviews to Twitter, I will only @ the author on positive reviews. I don't necessarily expect a response, but I know some authors like to blog/RT their positive reviews. I figure they can do with it what they will. (In truth, I'm terribly negligent about sending my reviews to Twitter, anyway.)

I don't @-check negative reviews. If there's any hesitation on my part about whether the author would want to read it, I don't Tweet it to the author. I don't want to be that person who tears an author down just because I didn't like his/her book. As a writer myself, I know how emotionally attached you can become to your work, and I wouldn't want someone doing that to me. Even most of my positive reviews have some criticisms, and I don't Tweet those, either.

To be honest, though, since I only blog about once a week, I have the luxury of picking and choosing the books I want to write about. I tend to write primarily about books I really liked. I decided some time ago that I'd rather be that person boosting the authors/books I enjoyed than eviscerating the ones I didn't. :-)
I think this is an excellent position. Thank you.
Good goddess. WTF is wrong with some people? My understanding is that tweeting @ a specific person is trying to start a conversation with them. Honestly, given some of the crap that you have gotten for being a woman writer who is open and vocal about diversity in fiction and other such things... I would almost wonder if some of these people were trying to ply you into engaging with a bad review... which would almost certainly cause Drama. (I wish I didn't have to think like this but given some of the things I have seen happen to other women authors, I really wouldn't put it past some people.)

Also, if I may say, I tweeted @ you regarding misreading the "New October Books" headline from my Goodreads emails and thinking immediately of Toby Daye. I may have let out a squee when I saw you replied. :)
Dude I do not know.

And honestly, I think some people do @ authors with negative reviews to try and start Drama, because Drama means page hits. I wish I didn't have to think that way. It sucks. But there it is.

Deleted comment

I dunno. If you see me in your toast, I'd like to know about it.

Deleted comment

Congrats on taking the high ground and sharing your frustration rather than responding to said silly people. Some internet users need to realize that they are talking in public. I'm sure they have their own lounge room where they can talk about whatever they want, chuck their opinions around as carelessly as they like. I am definitely opinionated but wouldn't want to share anything critical I say about a public person with the actual person. How horrid.

LOVE LOVE LOVE your work by the way :)
Thank you!
on a positive note, it means that your work is getting more popular and more people think your work is successful enough to mention on twitter. there are probably alot of authors out that there that would love to have this problem.

@Mira: please write more zombie books.
@Mira: you should have won the hugo.
Probably.
LJ has tripped me up with this, because at some point in the last couple of years, LJ started emailing you if someone else used your handle. And I literally *do* forget this happens and have used the LJ handles of authors when I'm reviewing their work. GAH.

Otherwise, I do avoid telling authors "I reviewed your work here!" unless my review is very positive.
That's a good policy.
User gailcarriger referenced to your post from Mademoiselle Geraldine's Advanced Twitter Etiquette saying: [...] Lady Linette suggests you read Seanan McGuire's excellent post: The terrible intimacy of @ [...]
Previous
← Ctrl ← Alt
Next
Ctrl → Alt →