Black Static

In my last blog on the subject of whether to review certain writers or not, I mentioned that I had had some minor spats with people who hadn't been pleased with my reviews (euphemism), and as it's late in the afternoon and I can't think of anything else to write about I thought I'd catalogue one or two, perhaps three or four, of these incidents, for lulz as all the web-smart kiddies say.

Example One

The editor who tracked down my home phone number and rang me up in the middle of the morning to ask whether a comment in a review of mine had been added by Andy (who he considered a rival), and then when I told him that it had not, threatened to sue me. I gave him the reasons for my comment, which were based on remarks he himself had made in print, and we went round and round until one of us hung up (I forget who). I'm still waiting to hear from his lawyers.

If anyone is thinking of pulling a similar stunt, I should warn you that I'm a lot less tolerant nowadays and the only answer you're likely to get is two words only one of which will be 'off'. Actually you might get three words, depending on how many cups of coffee I've had when you ring (I'm a beast until my third cup of instant).

Example Two

The writer who was perfectly okay with the bad review I gave his story, but so outraged by my comments on another story in the same magazine that he felt compelled to speak up in defence of the lady writer whose work I had maligned (this is called misdirection). While the website which ran my review had perfectly good forums where he could have argued his case, he choose to post on my message board on the old TTA forums, and as I wasn't online at the time ended up arguing with Joel Lane, Marion Arnott and Stu Young, before I could get to him, all of which was very amusing. Last I saw, he was on another message board protesting that my indifference to the lady writer's story was proof I had no soul. He was right about one thing - her story was much better than his own - but that was about the sum of it.

Example Three

The editor who challenged me to prove that I could do better than his contributors when I sent a LOC (letter of comment - somebody asked me what a LOC was a while back and it made me feel terribly old) highly critical of the first issue of his magazine. On a whim I sent him a story, figuring that he'd reject it with some scathing comments and get the thing out of his system. To my amazement he not only accepted that story, but a second I sent him, and I was quite prepared to applaud the guy as fair minded and magnanimous. Then my review appeared saying pretty much the same thing I'd said in the LOC and suddenly my stories got returned because the editor didn't think he could use them when I felt so negatively about his magazine. Apparently it was a matter of principle for him.

I blame myself for rising to the bait and submitting to this guy.

Short Intermission

My favourite rejection letter of all time involves a magazine I'd reviewed negatively. The editor wrote 'When I saw your comments about my magazine I was concerned. Having seen what you consider a good story I am no longer concerned.'

I know I shouldn't, but it's a putdown I find witty and quite amusing.

Example Four

The writer whose nose was so put of joint out by some of my comments about a story of his that, again even though the website where the review had appeared had a perfectly good forum of its own, he washed up on the TTA boards to express his disappointment (euphemism), bragging about how he'd told another reviewer to 'shut the f--- up' and spoiling for a fight, in which regard I didn't oblige him. That done, he ran off to the message boards of the magazine which had run his story and declared, paraphrasing, that I wasn't fit to review his work as I'd never eaten out of a dumpster (obviously the guy hasn't seen my cooking, in comparison to which dumpster dining seems like nouveau cuisine). Unfortunately he posted on a thread for a different issue of the magazine to the one I'd reviewed, one which another reviewer had given the thumbs up to, with the resultant confusion of other posters who couldn't fathom why he had a beef with the review (insert laughing emoticon here). In subsequent years I've seen him throw a similar tantrum with another reviewer.

The irony here is that the writer is actually very talented. During my time as part of the Interzone editorial team I was happy that we published his work and fully supported any acceptances, and my comments in the review of his story were far from being wholly negative (in essence, I didn't like the ending). In the future I expect him to produce some excellent stories and novels, but sadly you won't be reading about them in any of my reviews.

Example Five

I didn't like the first issue of Maelstrom magazine and laid out my reasons for that in a LOC to editor Malcolm Wright. He published the letter in the next issue and sent me a complimentary copy with the hope that I would like it more. I didn't and again LOCced him with the reasons, and again he published the letter and sent me a complimentary copy. We went on like this for several issues, with the magazine improving all the time and publishing contributors of the calibre of Nicholas Royle. Eventually I took out a subscription, submitted and had a story published in Maelstrom, and wrote some reviews for them as well. In my memory Malcolm Wright will always stand out as an example of how a gentleman publisher acts, and that's why he gets a name check and the others don't.

And he's also the only one of this group who managed to make me feel bad about giving him a negative review.

None of this amounts to very much as far as I'm concerned - water off a duck's back, as the saying goes - and indeed it's small potatoes compared to some of the slurs I've seen directed at other reviewers. But all the same there are lessons to be learned.

First and foremost, while writers and editors often take criticism personally, reviewers seldom intend it so. We are just doing a job. And generally, those who throw hissy fits when things don't go as they'd like, only end up damaging their own reputations. Making a success of a career in writing and/or publishing can be difficult enough without needlessly alienating people along the way.