The dark side of blurbs.

[seanan_mcguire]

I read a book recently* that I should have adored. It had a great cover, an interesting premise, and blurbs by several authors that I idolized and trusted. If they were endorsing it, it should have been amazing.

It is currently at the head of my short list for "worst book I read in 2012." I want those hours of my life back.

It wasn't offensive; it didn't call me names or slap my hands or steal my shit. It wasn't poorly written, although it had some pacing issues; the words were in the right order and generally spelled correctly. I can't in all good conscience call it a bad book. But I hated it. Absolutely, empirically, and with very few caveats. It was not my cup of tea. It wasn't even in my cup of tea's time zone. So why did I pick it up?

The blurbs. They made me think this book and I would get along, thus projecting one of the Geek Fallacies onto an innocent piece of prose. Friendship is not transitive, and neither is readability.

This is the dark side of blurbs: this is why authors sometimes have to say "no," even if they like another author's work. Because when I put my name on the cover of a book, I am saying "I like this, and if you like the things I like, you will like it, too." But what happens when you don't? Suddenly everything else I like is questionable. What if Diet Dr Pepper, Monster High dolls, and carnage are all waiting to betray you, too? Where is the line?

We have to be careful. We are trading on your faith, and our reputations.

Have you ever read a book based on the blurbs, only to find your faith in the authors who provided them somewhat shaken? Not your faith in the author who wrote the book—presumably, if you bought it based on blurbs, you didn't have any—but your faith in the blurbers?

(*No, I will not name the book. Why? Well, one, I am not in the business of bad book reviews, unless it's a non-fiction book riddled with factual errors. Other people obviously enjoyed this book, otherwise the blurbs wouldn't have been there in the first place. Your mileage may vary, and all. And two, as an author, I wouldn't want to find someone ranting about one of my books like this. So since the book didn't murder my puppies, I will not name it.)

Comments

[aubade-saudade.livejournal.com]

That doesn't happen to me, my faith is not shaken, because I'll often love very different types of books by very different types of writers for very different reasons. I've found lately that I'm not ireally into any one genre because to me it has more to do with the relationships I create with the books I love than with what "type" of book they are. So if the author loved a book that didn't jive with me, and it's about monster unicorns who suck people's blood and transform into high school teachers during the day time, it might be because their now deceased father used to read them unicorn stories and not because this is the best book ever-- which totally doesn't reflect badly on them as people, or readers or writers imo. I don't love every book I love because I think it's a piece of literary genius. Sometimes I'll love a book because it jives with my canon: my values, my philosophy of life, the books I most enjoyed as a child, the kinds of stories and characters I wish were written more and/or I find valuable at a social justice level, yada yada yada.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

Good approach.

[4byz4me.livejournal.com]

If I'm already seriously considering buying a book, a good blurb by an author I like will generally push me over the edge. Mostly I haven't been disappointed. Recently tho, there was a book in a genre that I don't normally go for but my oldest son is obsessed with and on one of the books I bought for him was a blurb by an author I like and since he loves when I read his books I told him I would actually be excited to read this one.

Huge mistake. It was plodding and I was completely unable to give two hoots about any of the characters. I had to force myself to finish it simply because I kept hoping for it to get better and I admit, the last sentence in it was good but it was soooo not worth reading the whole book for that one sentence.

Will I not trust blurbs by that author in the future? Definitely not when it comes to that genre.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

That makes a lot of sense.

[elialshadowpine.livejournal.com]

I have to admit I'm a little confused by the idea that if you like an author's work, you'll automatically like the things they like to read. See, some of my favorite authors have some... to me... bizarre tastes in reading that are nothing like what thy actually write. Many of them love books I loathe.

I learned pretty early not to trust author blurbs, for that reason. Also because often it became obvious the blurbers were often friends, and well, you know the whole thing about letting friends and family review. :P

And then I had an author friend rant about how she had been asked for a blurb, sent back a scathing letter, and had said scathing letter chopped up until they managed to make it sound like she loved the book. And her name went on it. She was furious. (With good reason.)

[nightfalltwen.livejournal.com]

I learned pretty early not to trust author blurbs, for that reason. Also because often it became obvious the blurbers were often friends

The Holly Black/Libba Bray/Cassandra Claire circle of besties does that.

[sibylle]

I've actually never given much for the blurbs, because I figured publishing houses, agents and money were a large part of who blurbs what and of what the blurb says ...

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

Mostly it's asking people you feel you can ask...which means there's a pre-existing relationship that's self-selecting for positive. Publishers will also solicit, but it's less common in my experience.

[tithenai.livejournal.com]

This one book was not only blurbed by all my favourite authors, Charles de Lint sang its praises to me all the time. And I read it. And it was the most mediocre thing ever. It did lead to me first talking to copperwise, though, whose review of it on Green Man was the FIRST time I saw anyone agree with me over the book's many flaws, so that was neat.

Guy Gavriel Kay once said that one should pay attention, in the blurb, to whether it's the novel or the author being praised. He confessed that he has sometimes written "this author is REALLY GOOD" on a meh book because the author in question had written better books and he didn't want NOT to blurb, etc.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

...ew.

Sad but true.

[bardling.livejournal.com]

Nope. I don't buy books based on blurbs. Occasionally a blurb may contribute to a decision to buy it, but it's never the reason. I don't like blurbs, they take up the space that the traditional back blurb, the one that says a little about the book and it's setting, or story, takes/took, or reduce it, and that I find much more likely to tell me something about whether I might like the book.

A recommendation by someone who knows what I have read and liked/disliked is something else. A statement about wether someone likes/dislikes the book (& preferably why/what about it), of whom I know what else they have read read and liked/disliked is also something else.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

That makes a lot of sense.

[sdelmonte]

I rarely use blurbs on fiction. A blurb is basically a reader liking something. And some writers, people with amazing talent, often like things that are not in the same league as their own works. Doesn't mean that if I were having a chat with someone like that, I wouldn't try to find out why the book or TV show or film is worth my time. But one sentence doesn't really make a difference.

And yet, when it comes to nonfiction, I do pay attention to a blurb. Because if the blurb is from someone I trust as a historian or biographer or scientist, it means that the research could be accurate. Here it's not just "X has written a good book" but also "X has does the homework." Even that is risky, but I've found that certain experts' names on the back of a book really mean the book means certain standards. If a work of history has approbations, on the other hand, from novelists, I usually give it a miss.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

That is a very, very good distinction.

[gentlewit.com (from livejournal.com)]

If you ever do read a book that does murder puppies, I would take it as a personal kindness if you would name it, please?

And yes, I've had that exact experience. More than once, I'm sad to say. Though, I can only think of one example readily and I'm still convinced that all the authors who blurbed that book did so straight after a fun night with tequila.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

In that case, yes. The book will be named.

[foz meadows (from livejournal.com)]

Honestly, no, because I don't expect perfect overlap between my tastes and those of any other person. Which seems to be what you're arguing for, somehow: that any instance in which Author Y blurbs a book that Fan X doesn't like can only be the result of Author Y having compromised their blurbing principles rather than Fan X simply having non-identical tastes. The friends with whom I have the strongest, most passionate agreement about the stories we love are also the friends with whom I have the most passionate disagreements. Different people can love the same thing in different ways, for different reasons, and to different degrees. So, yeah, if I were to see a book blurbed by (for instance) you, Holly Black and Nick Harkaway, I would buy the hell out of it - but if I didn't like it, I wouldn't think any of you had betrayed me; I'd just think that the three of you had found a common point of interest that I didn't happen to share. Which happens!

The only exception here is if a book blurbed by an author I respected was actually terribly written - like, empirically terribly, containing themes I knew (or thought I knew) that the blurber found offensive, in a way that made me wonder if they'd even actually read it. That might give me pause for thought. But that's not what you're describing, and it's not something I've ever encountered. Though on the reverse, I have ignored blurbs from authors I dislike or am ambivalent towards when choosing books that other people have suggested: I kept away from The Hunger Games for ages because Stephenie Meyer had blurbed it, for instance, and only gave it a shot because Faith Erin Hicks said how awesome it was.

Anyway! :)

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

I'm not arguing for perfect overlap: in this case, there were FOUR blurbs by people I normally trust implicitly, all implying that the book was the second coming. And that kind of layering is what it takes to get me to pick something up purely on basis of blurbs. I found it troublesome and weird; hence my posting.

[the-gwenzilliad.livejournal.com]

I've been disappointed by author blurbs in the past. This is one reason why I really love ebooks -- there's less scrummy marketing for me to be influenced by. When I come across a series of bad author blurbs, I do not assume that the author who wrote the blurb has bad taste. I assume they haven't actually read the book and were asked to do a favour for an author acquaintance, the niece of an author acquaintance, their publisher, their agent's grandniece, or something like that. I look at the language they use as well. If it's full of superlatives and sounds like a high school candid photo caption, I don't go for it. If it has a little detail, I'm more likely to pick up the book based on a blurb.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

Makes sense.

Also, once a blurb is given, it "belongs" to the series. So my publisher can't use Toby blurbs on InCryptid, but can use a positive blurb for Rosemary and Rue for every Toby book, forever.

[ex-naomi-ja.livejournal.com]

I have to say, I am very, very rarely influenced by author blurbs. I tend to look at them last - cover art, descriptions, reviews and word of mouth from friends will all affect my decisions more than an author blurb. I'm not sure why that is, because when I look at my book collection, I do seem to gravitate towards books rec'd by authors I like. But for me, a brief line on the cover saying, "I loved this book" by Author X doesn't mean as much to me as the other aspects. And if I read a book I hated which was blurbed by an author I liked, I wouldn't be put off that author. I know I've adored books other people loathed and vice versa, so I don't worry that if Author X really likes Book Z and I hate it, I will therefore hate Author X. I think that makes sense...?

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

That makes sense!

[literal-alchemy.livejournal.com]

Understamding that taste is not transitive I don't hold it against them. I think of reading like food. You like this dish and think I might, if I don't it's not anyone's *fault*. You had good intentions but they didn't work out. What I will do is be more skeptical about your recommendations in the future.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

Makes sense.

[b.e. sanderson (from livejournal.com)]

I had that happen to me just this past fall with a book you blurbed. I don't remember the title or the author. Heck, I didn't make it past the first few chapters. There wasn't anything really wrong with the book. It was UF, it had magical people, carnage was happening... usually my type of stuff - I just couldn't get into it. So, I gave it to my daughter. She loved LOVED it. Needless to say, it didn't shake my faith in you as an author. I'll still rush out to buy your books. I'll even still buy books you've recommended and take my chances that I may pick up one that doesn't blow my skirt up. Stuff happens. I don't let it kill my readerly love, or there'd be a few other authors I wouldn't read again. (Because, hey, different people have different tastes.)

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

Absolutely.

[janeg.livejournal.com]

I run into this in my work life - colleagues ask me to review their books thinking that because we know each other I'll be positive, or they ask for a blurb. I certainly won't write an untrue blurb. I'm struggling right now with a review, written my an influential man in my community and a related field - but he chose to write a book in my area of expertise and he doesn't know what he's talking about. I am working up the courage to send him an advance copy of a bad review. I'm committed to publishing a review, and besides I need to warn a local college to stop using this book in a course.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

...ugh. Bad position.

[stormsdotter.livejournal.com]

I put very little stock in blurbs. Just because I like an author's books does not mean I will love everything the author loves. Case in point: you adore Stephen King. I adore your books. I have read a few of King's works, and I do not care for his writing style. I can understand and appreciate why he's so popular, I just prefer Lovecraft.

However, every single time jimhines reviews a book, I end up loving it. We seem to be on the same reading wavelength. When he reviews a book, I look for it in the Boston Public Library and then my local bookstore.

Have I thanked you enough for blogging about him? :)

[dornbeast.livejournal.com]

I've never done well with Stephen King. The only book of his that I go back to is Firestarter.

[dornbeast.livejournal.com]

I never read a book based on the blurbs. I buy books based on past performance ("Bujold! Brust in Dragaera! Seanan!"). Otherwise, I use two things when I decide to buy a book: the first chapter, and the second chapter.

If a book can't grab me with two chapters, it probably won't manage it at all.

It doesn't have to be the same reason, either. Snow Crash grabbed me with the description of its world. Yendi got my attention for the interaction between Vlad and Loiosh. But if the hook isn't set by the end of chapter two, I'll put it back. It's something like going to a free concert. If the opening grabs me, there's a better chance that I'll stay for the whole thing.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

Makes good sense.

[kk1raven.livejournal.com]

I've never come across anyone else whose tastes exactly match mine, so I don't put all that much stock in blurbs. A blurb from an author whose blurbs are typically for books I do like will at cause me to at least consider the book, but if I see the blurb, I'm probably already considering the book. The blurbs are just one factor though. I don't choose books specifically because an author I like wrote a blurb for it.

At this point I don't consider blurbs much at all because seeing them requires seeing the book which mostly is not happening until after I've bought it. That's what I hate about not having any local bookstores that I'm willing to purchase books from. It is hard for me to choose new authors without a good bookstore to browse in. Browsing online just doesn't do it for me.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

That's a good approach.

[cryptaknight.livejournal.com]

I'm reminded of the scene on Castle where he is asked to blurb a book, and does so by holding the the book up to his forehead and then spouting a bunch of vague nonsense. I'm sure some authors do thoughtful and honest blurbs, and then there are others I think are just helping out their friends (the Holly Black/Cassie Claire thing comes to mind), and then there are those that do what Rick Castle does, lol. I definitely take blurbs with a grain of salt.

Monster High will not betray you. Have you seen the new things from Toy Fair? OMG.

And carnage seems nothing if not consistent. I can't speak to Diet Dr Pepper because I've stopped drinking any variety of Dr Pepper since the fiasco of the "DR PEPPER TEN IS NOT FOR WOMEN" campaign.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

Monster High hasn't betrayed me yet!

[fadethecat.livejournal.com]

A blurb from an author I like may catch my eye, but it's not quite the same as selling me on a book. Not because I've been deeply disappointed after any particular blurb, but because I've noticed that the implied comparison is often between my least favorite parts of a favorite author and the new book. I mean, I like A Game of Thrones, but a blurb from GRRM probably means the book is GRIM GRIM GRIMDARK BLOOD GRIMDARK, which is actually something I sort of tolerate in his work because I like other aspects, not a selling point for me. Similarly, I love Bujold's writing, but a comparison to the Vorkosigan series often means "Woo, spaceships!" when I sort of put up with space battles so that I can get to interesting social change based on technology that affects gender dynamics. Or mysteries and romantic comedy in spaaaaaace.

Which I suppose is just another way of noting the Venn Diagram thing that other people have been mentioning. I more often work from reviews than blurbs, these days, and my favorite reviewers are the ones who can enthuse about things in a way that warns me to stay away from 'em, or critique in a way that tells me I'll like the book. (I have at least one dear friend whose whole-hearted recommendation for a book as the Best Thing Ever is a sure sign I should stay away from it, and I've only missed out a good movie/TV show once based on this process.)

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

Venn Diagrams rule us all.

[bigherman.livejournal.com]

Now I'm wondering if this was the book I picked up at your place because it was blurbed by authors I like, but turned out to be a pile of "meh."

Generally, I don't do this, but it was an easy way to decide what to read when faced with your library.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

I don't know! But probably.

[smoooom.livejournal.com]

it depends on the person who wrote the blurb. I like to read a chunk first. If the book doesn't grab me in the first chapter I don't buy it.

It is the biggest disadvantage to ebooks. It's why I still go to an actual store before I buy.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

This makes total sense.

[yellowblackhaze.livejournal.com]

It happened to me last year. A book came out that looked intriguing, the blurb was good, the reviews were excellent and the book just did not work for me. It was so well received by almost everyone else that I was actually hesitant to put a negative review on my blog, but I did and was a little heartened to find that it wasn't just me. I'm a little more wary of well reviewed books as a consequence.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

I get that.

[ashtara-silunar.livejournal.com]

It depends a lot. If I'm browsing and find two interesting-looking books (we'll say two for the sake of the sentence, it's usually six or eight), and they all look equally intriguing... then yes, a blurb by an author I love will influence me towards that book. But it's the last on a long list of factors, not a primary source of decision making.

Most influential source? My friends. One guy I know has a 100% success rate on his book recommendations to me; if he tells me it's good, I go out and buy it.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

Wow.

That is a good friend to have.

[ravenclawed.livejournal.com]

To be honest, I don't think I've ever bought books based on endoresements by other authors. I normally buy books based on the summary on the back cover. If that doesn't interest me, it doesn't matter if my favorite authors loved the book to bits.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

That's a good approach.

[azurelunatic]

Yes, actually.

The book in question was published through a tiny independent publishing house that has since disappeared, and was billed as absolutely hilarious, with page after page of "this is how funny this book is, for srs" in the beginning. It was like instead of selecting the best pull quotes for "this book is aces funny" from the solicited blurbs, they had decided that paper was cheap and to print the whole thing. Up front. So I waded through all these quotes and then into the book, with brilliantly high expectations.

Oh god. It was not ... oh god. It had the potential to be hilarious. As a tell-aloud tale, which was how many of the blurbers had encountered it, at various cons, it was surely side-splitting. Unfortunately the author and the editors either lacked the skill or the time to translate out-loud hilarity into page-based hilarity. The actual plot based its punch on political ideas that were probably aces at the time that the thing was published but in the decade or so intervening, had entirely lost their shine, and basically I wanted to punch a smug social-issues-are-easy libertarian in the teeth. (There are many kinds of libertarians, and some of them are even included among my friends. This book was just that bad.)

I cannot entirely blame the blurbers in question, because the author was surely their friend, and surely also they have seen writing with more issues become excellent work. This was ... just not. No. Aiigh. RETURN TO EDITORS AND ALSO RETURN TO THE 90S.

[seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com]

RETURN TO EDITORS AND ALSO RETURN TO THE 90S.

Best anger is best.