This is a true story.
All of my stories are true, anyway.
So, this morning, I noticed that I'd been mentioned by a book blogger on Twitter, on his regular IMM post. IMM is book-blogger talk for In My Mailbox, which are posts that tell the titles of the books the blogger has received that week.
So I wanted to see what book of mine was mentioned, and I saw that Feiwel and Friends, my publisher, had sent him an e-book copy of Stick.
Cool.
Interestingly, when he listed Stick, it was a hyperlink. So, I clicked on the link because I was pretty sure the blogger, a really prolific book reviewer named Alex Bennett, hadn't read or reviewed Stick yet.
It turned out the link took me to the Goodreads page for Stick.
Most people know how I feel about Goodreads. I do not ever read stuff on Goodreads. It is bad for authors to do shit like that.
Goodreads can suck out an author's soul.
Goodreads to an author is like a mirror to a meth smoker. Once you start looking, you'll never be able to pull yourself out.
But there I was, face to face with Goodreads' page for my Stick. I could not help but see that the book had a very nice rating, and quite a number of reviews, too.
But I was not looking.
I refused to look.
Except at the very first review. It was a really nice review, and it was written by a bookseller named Rachael, who works at Powell's Books in Portland.
First off, most people know how I feel about indie stores and the people who work in them. Indie stores are the only real places to buy books, and indie booksellers truly read and love books. And Powell's is like the Holy Land to authors who love indie booksellers.
So, to get a nice review from a bookseller who A) knows her shit, and B) works at Powell's is... well... pretty freaking amazing.
So it turns out Powell's has my books listed in their YA books for boys section.
That is the shit.
You can read Rachael's Goodreads review of Stick here.
Alex Bennett's IMM post is here.
And, Rachael, do not worry. I will send you a signed copy of Stick as soon as it comes out.
19 comments:
I have often wondered what IMM stood for. Thanks for clearing that one up.
Rachel's review is motivating me.
Rachael*
Julie Halpern's protagonists visit Powell's in her excellent DON'T STOP NOW.
Such a nice review--well deserved.
How could I possibly worry? I'm so pleased and excited that you noticed my review. I've been stewing in agony for weeks about how to send you an email thanking you for inspiring my Books for Guys display without coming across as too obsessive. One of these days I'll get caught up on my Goodreads and post my Marbury Lens and Ghost Medicine reviews as well.
And believe me, if I had any power in the publicity department, your reading would already be scheduled.
I'm holding you to that signed copy, too. I've already started bragging about it.
I will message you as soon as I get my author copies. You will have a book.
I love Goodreads and I'll tell you why. My latest, PLAGUE, has a higher overall score than THE GREAT GATSBY. It's not even close. Fitzgerald can't even break into the fours. I also kick HUCKLEBERRY FINN's butt. And I edge out HAMLET.
Because I am just that damn good, that's why.
How can you not love that?
This is quite possibly the greatest comment I have ever received on my blog.
By the way, Michael, if you are by any chance going to be in the SoCal area at the end of October (not for SCIBA, although it would be nice to tip a glass with you), we need another RARE BIRD - a guy who writes so-called YA at our Boys and Books event (the Why Chromosome).
First of all I have a problem with your metaphor, and I bet you know what it is, but it's something we'll have to talk about face to face.
Second: fuck yeah. I read that unreview, loved it, and immediately friended Rachael on Goodreads. Like Emmet, Rachael knows what's up.
Also, Michael Grant, you are fucking hilarious. I really need to read your books.
The only problem is that I think Goodreads is mostly smoke and mirrors. People have no problem reaming classics written by dead authors, but they generally kiss a lot of ass when it comes to their contemporaries.
Not that that's happening to Mike. I know Andrew loves his shit, and that's good enough for me. It probably is five star caliber stuff, like the blue cocaine from Bolivia.
Er, wait. I don't know anything about that.
Another also: it's funny that you use the word legs in the title of this post. Because legs is a drug term. A meth term, to be specific.
And I'm glad you didn't okay my other comment. Please know that I often read your blog drunk, or sad, or just fucking loco en la cabesa, so I hope I can count on you to edit me.
Like this one. Please don't okay this comment. Unless you really want to.
Oops.
Last Legs is the title of a chapter of the book I just wrote. So is
Denny Drayton Has a Gun, Motherfucker
...which I thought may cause people to express displeasure if I used it to title a post.
You're such an asshole, but I can't help but smile at your chutzpah. I can't wait to discuss this shit with you. We better score some meth for that night, though, because the conversation may go on FOREVER.
Please put motherfucker in the title of a post. It's the best curse word ever. Is that related to valleys, grasshopper?
Having read STICK and loved it I hope Alex loves it too!
Rachael's review was amazing, and I'll be completely honest in saying that I am jealous that her review was so much better than mine! :)
I learn so much from this blog and the posts that I can't believe it. I have been remiss in my reading because the first two weeks of teaching whack me upside the head like the red-headed stepchild I am.
Matthew, seriously. About Goodreads. I have a shelf called "Another Level" and relatively few things make this list, and this list is reserved for the books that are touchstones for me. I don't rate my contemporaries unless their books are touchstones. I also don't think anyone actually cares what I think, so it's mostly personal reflection. But here is what I wrote about Stick:
I was completely in love with this book before the first chapter;opening poem killed me. I read it in one sitting, staying up to finish because I could not bear to leave Stick. This book is one of those books that makes you want to be a better everything--person,teacher,writer in my case--I tweeted a few days ago that it echoes in my bones. Three days later, it still does.
Thank you,Andrew Smith.
So, yeah, there are times when five stars are merited. I still feel Stick in my bones, look for his face as my kids enter the class.
Another lesson from this blog/posts: Read Michael Grant.
I love Michael Grant. He is a true friend and a voice of reason in a profession that is so full of self-absorbed and shallow twits.
I'm wondering if I should mention that I have an article in the October VOYA about how much I like Goodreads as a librarian and how it's helped me connect with readers I serve.
Degolar, I love VOYA. I don't think I ever implied here (certainly did not intend to) that Goodreads was inherently bad or that people should avoid it.
It is TERRIBLE for authors to get sucked into reading anything-goes review sites, though. I know of authors who will even send out mass emails to readers to try to boost their Goodreads ratings.
Ridiculous and shallow behavior.
You're a librarian. I'm not.
I get the news I need on the weather report.
Have you ever been to an art museum or art gallery? You know what makes me want to punch someone in the throat? When I'm at an art museum and some loudmouth douchebag beside me is talking to his friends about the composition and intention of the artist... about the meaning and nuance of what is on display. That's what Goodreads is like to me... Too many unqualified douchebags spouting off about shit they have no capacity to analyze... just loud enough so the person ten feet away will glance over at them as though they're comparing penis size in a public shower.
It's not for me.
I completely understand and what you're saying makes a lot of sense. I've had authors "like" my reviews of their titles and felt it was too self-serving for my tastes (especially the one who did so within five minutes of my posting the review).
One thing I really attempt to do with my reviews is convey that what I'm sharing is my personal experience of a book from my personal perspective, and not an objective, definitive pronouncement about the quality of the book in a vacuum or the abilities of the author. My lengthy review of The Marbury Lens, for example, is really two reviews: the first half was my experience when I read it and the second was my experience when I listened to it, and I admit how my moods impacted and changed what I experienced. (No link to it unless you ask; I don't Goodreads as "Degolar.")
I don't know what will make the final edits, so here's a section of the article I wrote:
. . . Goodreads is a less direct method for creating this kind of relationship. Full interactivity is possible through friending and comments, and the tool is just an extension of the relationship I have with many friends and colleagues, but that level of engagement is not necessary. Since I’ve made my reviews public, anyone—with a Goodreads account or not—can follow me. This is much more one-sided. I don’t have the opportunity to listen to followers or get to know them in customizing my recommendations; they just listen to me.
Knowing that impacts the way I write my reviews. As a reader of book and movie reviews, I try to always follow the same reviewers so I get to know them. Sometimes I won’t trust a good review or will be excited by a bad review because I know the likes and dislikes of my reviewer and how they’re similar to and different than my own. So I don’t try to hide my personal biases in my reviews or reach for objectivity, but instead am free with my opinions and do my best to let my personality shine through. Each review is different because what I try to capture is my experience with that book from my perspective. By doing so, I hope to be enough of a person that readers can establish a relationship with me through my reviews, even if they never interact with me in person.
One other thing I hope to accomplish with my reviews is modeling personal engagement with reading. I believe a lifelong love of reading is based in intrinsic motivation, reading not because it is a school assignment or job duty or for others in some way, but simply because it is an enjoyable and fulfilling activity in its own right. Often, I find formulaic reviews can come across to me as too objective and dispassionate, with the reviewers focusing on who might enjoy the book and why instead of what they personally enjoyed about it. Goodreads allows me the freedom to focus on what the book’s appeal factors were for me, adapting what I say each time to what got me excited about the book. Sometimes that means writing my review in the style of the book, sometimes it means reflecting more on a personal experience or belief the book brought to mind, sometimes it means finding representative quotes that tickled or delighted me, and sometimes it means something else entirely. By doing this, I hope to show young readers what they take from a book is up to them and not based on what the experts or popular opinion say they should. . . .
Post a Comment