Comics Reviews: To Trash or Not to Trash

[Michael May]

Kelly Sue and I started a conversation on another thread that went to PMs, but we think might be interesting to discuss it in public.

Kelly Sue reviews graphic novels for artbomb.net and I review comics and edit other reviewers for Comic World News. A while back Kelly Sue sent me a book (written by a friend of hers) to review. I've been struggling with how to approach writing the review because I can see that the creators put a lot of heart (and money) into making it, but at the end of the day, I didn't care for it.

I asked Kelly Sue what they do on artbomb when they run into situations like that. Artbomb's misson is to recommend books, not trash them. I want CWN to have a similar goal. Rather than tell people what sucks and make the very difficult indie/self-publishing job even harder for creators involved in it, I'd rather concentrate on recommending the really great books out there.

So, before we decided to move the conversation to the board I'd asked Kelly Sue what artbomb does when it receives a book for review and they don't like it? Do they just not review it?

And my next question is: if they don't review it, what responsibility do they feel to the creator or publisher who sent them the book? Does that person get a letter explaining why the book isn't going to be reviewed?

We have a few self-publishers here on the board too. What do you guys think about this? If a critic doesn't like your book, what would you prefer them to do about it?

[darkcult]

Be honest. At the end of the day it’s just your opinion and someone else might like the book. Don’t get me wrong but most of the times I don’t read what critics have to say, unless they themselves have a body of work behind them (art or literature) that will give them the ground to stand on.
At the end of the day it’s easy to put the “cherries and cream” on the good book, but then again that’s like jumping on the band wagon and everybody’s happy, but if you think that book is bad, well, have balls and publish that.
If time proves you wrong that means you have to look for a different job, and you’re crap critic. On the other side if time proves you right ,that’s one more step closer to the reputation of honest and good critic.
I say publish it.

[AnthV]

Ah this is a goody. I guess it depends on the type of reviewer you want to be. I frequent Art Bomb alot and check out books based on their recommendations. I do this because I am a comic reader that does not enjoy the average comic. I know Art bomb avoids the big 2 publishers so I know by going there I can find something more my steam.

Now that being said, if a guy like me wants to know about a more popular book or a superhero story from one of the major players, I want to know if it is good or bad. I mean thats why you review things. There are alot of comics out there independant and not and a picky bastard like myself wants to know what's good and not.

I've bought things based on bad reviews before because everything the reviewer listed he hated about it, I liked. So it's not always a slap in the face.

If someone sends you something and wants you to review it you owe them nothing but honesty and your true thoughts on the material. You didn't ask them to send it to you so they should not assume you will give it a favourable response. I understand they put alot of time, effort and money into their project but it doesn't mean it's good because of this.

I have so much more to say but I hate typeing so I'll wait to read what other folks are saying...

[Kelly Sue]

//So, before we decided to move the conversation to the board I'd asked Kelly Sue what artbomb does when it receives a book for review and they don't like it? Do they just not review it?//

Bingo.

We subscribe to the 'If you can't say something nice...' philosophy on artbomb. In fact (as I mentioned in our e-mail conversation) I don't always feel comfortable referring to artbomb.net as a "review" site, as I don't think that's what it is. The mission is to point readers -- those with experience reading graphic novels *and* those without -- to books we think they might enjoy in the genres that that prefer. The idea is to show the outside world that graphic novels are a medium, not a genre. And that's why we don't include any superhero books, no matter how brilliant. Cape capers don't need our help.

Now, that doesn't mean we have to be MADLY IN LOVE with every aspect of every book we cover. Mixed reviews are fine, as long as they're books we'd still recommend.

//And my next question is: if they don't review it, what responsibility do they feel to the creator or publisher who sent them the book? Does that person get a letter explaining why the book isn't going to be reviewed?//

No, they don't. We don't feel obligated to cover anything we don't like and we don't feel obligated to like something because someone sent it to us.

Pretend it's not comics and you won't bat an eye.

And that goes for the book I sent you -- you're under no obligation to cover it, and you're certainly under no obligation to cover it positively.

Okay, your questions answered, I have a little musing to do on this topic:

I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I think that the barrier to publishing comics is far too low and the quality of 90% of what's out there is...far too low.

Thinking critically about comics serves the industry, IMHO.

On the other hand, the barrier to becoming a comics reviewer is also far too low. Most of the review sites out there are thinly-disguised cheering squads or industry ass-kissing by wannabe pros. "Green Arrow #4839 KICKED ASS!!" is not a review. (The manga sites might be the worst offenders. If you hate the English language and want to see it slaughtered by barely-literate pre-teens and smelly middle-aged otaku - google search "manga reviews." Then again, they're recommending books to each other, based on their own criteria -- and they pay my bills -- so who the hell am I?)

Now, contradicting something I said to you earlier: I don't think anyone is actually served by reading a negative review of their own book. I don't know this to be true, but it's my gut feeling. I think people -- even and including pros -- tend to react defensively to such things and frankly, I think you're better off NOT reading reviews of your own work. Get feedback from your editors and your friends and make the book the best you can and once it's out -- let it go. Trust your own critical thinking and move on to the next thing. Make it better. Lather, rinse, repeat.

So, who is served by a negative review? Well, certainly if people go to your site for recommendations of what to read or not read, they could be saved a little time and money by being ushered away from a book. Of course, you don't need to trash a book to do that. You could simply not cover it, or you could do a simple Not Recommended listing.

What about the industry? Is the industry served by negative reviews? Hm. It would depend, I guess. I would say that if a book so awful it ought not to have been published (and again, many, many writers who wouldn't stand a chance in a prose market, are regularly published -- or self-published -- in comics) it's best just to pretend it never happened. Don't speak of it. Trashing it is not going help anybody. The creator is obviously deluded and they're not going to come to any epiphany on that topic because you hated their work, and everybody else probably knows it sucks anyway. Like, you know, if the Diamond soliciation comes with matching panties -- probably not going to be a seminal work of fiction. Kind of goes without saying.

On the other hand, if the book is not entirely worthless -- if it aimed high, but missed the mark, I'd say a reasoned analysis of where if failed and how it succeeded *does* serve the industry. I'd still advise the creator not to read it because nobody wants to see their babies dismembered (well, maybe some of you sick fucks, but mostly not), but the rest of us? The rest of us should be reading and writing more such critical analyses -- because that's how we grow and learn.

Of course, a reasoned analysis is not something I can whip out in the hour or so it takes me to put together an artbomb piece. So. I look to the gifted voices at The Comics Journal for such things.

[Greg McElhatton]

Geez, if I sent e-mails to everyone whose submitted book I didn't review, that's all I'd do every waking hour... I'd say I get about 30 books in the mail every week. Sometimes more.

I certainly review more books I like than dislike; if it's the latter, it's because of a specific reason. Often it's because there's potential there, it just doesn't quite hit the mark, so I end up pointing both the pros and cons of the book and let the readers make up their mind.

(Truly negative reviews are pretty rare for me but do happen. Often when they're a book that I think people are going to just buy blindly for whatever reason and they need a big warning of the disaster awaiting them.)

[Kelly Sue]

[Greg! Yay!]

[Michael May]

I should clarify that I'm not nervous about writing negative reviews in general. I've written plenty already. Though I've rarely trashed a book, there have been books that were flawed and I've pointed those flaws out with complete honesty.

What I was struggling with is the direction of CWN's column. I love what Artbomb does for all the reasons AnthV listed and I was toying with the idea of making CWN more like that. Kelly's response changed my mind for a couple of reasons.

Originally posted by Kelly Sue
...if a book is so awful it ought not to have been published ...it's best just to pretend it never happened. Don't speak of it. Trashing it is not going help anybody.

...On the other hand, if the book is not entirely worthless -- if it aimed high, but missed the mark, I'd say a reasoned analysis of where if failed and how it succeeded *does* serve the industry.

That's incredibly helpful and validating. It shows me that what CWN's been doing already with its reviews is a good approach.

Something else helpful that you said is this:

Originally posted by Kelly Sue
We don't feel obligated to cover anything we don't like and we don't feel obligated to like something because someone sent it to us.

I have felt obligated to cover everything and it's liberating to know that if I can't find anything positive to say about a book, I have the option of just not saying anything at all.

Thanks, Kelly Sue.

[Gav]

Dude, who reads your reviews anyways?

Just focus on the good points. Everyone has to take the rough with the smooth, these creators know this.

At the end of the day knowing there are flaws in their products can only be a good thing.

[Michael May]

Originally posted by Greg McElhatton
Geez, if I sent e-mails to everyone whose submitted book I didn't review, that's all I'd do every waking hour... I'd say I get about 30 books in the mail every week. Sometimes more.

I certainly review more books I like than dislike; if it's the latter, it's because of a specific reason. Often it's because there's potential there, it just doesn't quite hit the mark, so I end up pointing both the pros and cons of the book and let the readers make up their mind.

(Truly negative reviews are pretty rare for me but do happen. Often when they're a book that I think people are going to just buy blindly for whatever reason and they need a big warning of the disaster awaiting them.)

More helpful and validating comments! Thanks!

[Michael May]

Originally posted by Gav
Dude, who reads your reviews anyways?

rassinfrassin...

[Gav]

Originally posted by Michael May
rassinfrassin...

C'mere ya big lug....

[Michael May]

[Kelly Sue]

Originally posted by Michael May
More helpful and validating comments! Thanks!

Greg does good work.

I want to add something -- I say it's best not to read your reviews and I believe that that's true. But that doesn't mean that I'm necessarily able to do it! I confess, I have a googlealert set up for any mention of Sensual Phrase. (iComics covered it recently.)

Then again, Sensual Phrase isn't entirely my work -- it's my adaptation of Mayu Shinjo's work. So it's very easy for me to mentally take credit for any good mention (outside of the art) and, you know, blame her for any negative feedback on the story elements.

I'm human, you know.

[Kelly Sue]

Originally posted by Michael May
I have felt obligated to cover everything and it's liberating to know that if I can't find anything positive to say about a book, I have the option of just not saying anything at all.

Thanks, Kelly Sue. [/b]

Any excuse not to work!

Back to Girl Got Game Vol. 6...

[Dan Wickline]

I'm mixed on this one. Any press is good press right? Do you think Van Helsing would have done as well if no one talked about it? All the bad reviews and it still made 52 Million opening weekend. And I don't believe everything a reviewer says as gospel. I have often gone to badly reviewed movies coming out thinking they were good and positively reviewed movies thinking they were crap.

If someone sends you a book to review, they want a review... there is never a guarantee that it will be a good review. I sent The Conversation to Steven Grant knowing that he tends to hate EVERYTHING but I also know that he writes reviews on everything he is sent and getting the book mentioned in his column was the goal.

So, I'd say if the creators send it in, review it either way. If you are just buying it and it sucks... then you can let it go.

Just my two cents worth.