"Reviews are none of your business!"
Also, sorry I'm late
NEWS:
Been sick as a dog all week1, barely left the house, achieved nothing. Which is why this is late. Sorry.
Had an idea for a new book, to add to the list of ideas for new books I have that aren’t either a) being written or b) getting my existing books finished. Win!
ON WRITING:
I have read, to my knowledge, every review of every book I’ve written2. This is not, my publisher informs me, how one should conduct oneself as an author. This week’s newsletter title is a direct quote from Angel and, judging by online chat, she’s in a consensus with most sane writers.
I, however, am cut from a different, stupider cloth. Despite having serious self-esteem issues, I’m paradoxically also extremely vain, and so am always interested in what people think of me and, by extension, my work.
It’s not always positive.
With my well-documented MH issues, this is a recipe for disaster, surely. Yet strangely, the odd fleeting moment of crushing self-doubt and vow to never write another word aside, I do seem relatively impervious to criticism. Which got me thinking, why is that?
Firstly, I genuinely don’t think you could offer me a criticism I haven’t already made of myself. If you’ve thought something bad about me, or about one of my books, I can all-but guarantee you’re not the first person to say it. I was here first.
Secondly, even I can’t ignore my accomplishments. At this point, I simply can’t overlook the fact that I’m a published author. I’ve had two books trad-published, by two different publishers, that have both been well received. Readers have enjoyed them. I’ve self-published five novels, again enjoyed by my readers3. They may not be perfect but… let’s make that point three, actually.
I, and by extension my work, am not perfect. I’ve written nine books to date, but I intend to write more and I still hope to get better with each book. I aspire to learn and develop as a writer which means, by definition, there must be something about my work currently that can be improved. I can’t get any better without being less than perfect now. Ergo being criticised doesn’t counter my own view of where I’m at as a writer.
And when it comes to the nature of the criticism, the two things to remember are:
Either the criticism is expressed harshly or constructively. If it’s the former, pfft. If it’s the latter, no harm done, and maybe there’s something to take from it. Which leads to…
Either the criticism is well founded, or it’s not. If you read the criticism and reflect on it, you will either agree with it or you won’t. If you think they have a point, brilliant, that’s something you can work on. If you disagree, then fine, no problem. If you’re happy the fault is theirs for not seeing/understanding what you were doing, why be upset? Possibly consider if there were ways you could have been clearer but, ultimately, their loss.
You’ll note from the way I seamlessly segued from first to second person, that' I’m sort of offering this up for advice, not just self-reflection. So I should admit, it’s easy to take this view when the positive/negative feedback ratio is in your favour. I’ve yet to be properly trolled4, so I’m not saying it’s always this easy to be this chill about it. But the last thing to say is:
I write for myself. It’s all you can do. It’s awesome when other people love what you’re doing and so, yeah, it kinda sucks when someone really, really doesn’t. But ultimately I’m either pleased with what I’ve written or I’m not. That’s the only criticism that matters. So maybe there’s little point in reading the reviews, maybe it’s sensible to stay away, or maybe it’s okay to have a little look every now and then. It depends on the individual, but you’re the only critic you need to please.
One final thought, the only Golden Rule is:
DON’T ENGAGE. If a reader wants interaction, they know where you are. Nobody wants authors (or any creators) popping up online to give feedback on their feedback. Grayson Perry doesn’t stand in the gallery telling you whether you’re right about why you do or don’t like his pots. You’ve put something out there, it’s on its own now.
I have enjoyed:
As noted above, I’ve been sick the past week and barely moved from my couch. By my reckoning, I’ve watched 29 movies since my last newsletter three weeks ago, twenty of those in the past week. My couch now has a perfect imprint of my butt which I’m pretty sure is permanent. I’d love to tell you about all of them, but nobody wants that5. However…
Women Talking - Rooney Mara, Claire Foy and Jessie Buckley head a strong ensemble cast in Sarah Polley’s 2022 movie about a group of Mennonite women debating their next steps in the light of the uncovering of systematic sexual assault being perpetrated by members of their community, and the demands of their Elders that the women forgive their abusers or face expulsion themselves. The title’s deliberate, there is little else in the film other than women talking, and it’s a triumph. Pertinent, resonant and in today’s climate, utterly relevant.
“I knew I should have held out for Women Talking 2: Women Actually Doing Something.” The Sacrifice - Solaris-director Andrei Tarkovsky’s final movie sees an actor celebrating his birthday with his family when nuclear war breaks out. From there, stuff happens. Slow-paced, jarring, flat-out-weird in parts, it’s somehow one of the most… satisfying movies I’ve ever seen. I couldn’t begin to tell you why.
One of The Sacrifice’s more thrilling action sequences. Twilight’s Last Gleaming - The sort of ensemble cast action thriller the seventies seemed to do so well, Twilight’s Last Gleaming has Burts Lancaster and Young, together with Paul Winfield, take over a US ICBM silo and threaten to launch unless the President releases classified documents detailing the cynical reasons that the Vietnam War was prolonged. The mighty Joseph Cotten and personal hero Richard Widmark are also present but the film somehow belongs to Charles Durning (Pappy O’Dowd in the Coens’ O Brother Where Art Thou6) and his performance as President David Stevens, clearly out of his depth and almost out of control but holding it together due to his basic integrity. Imagine.
“Actually, the office was named after the table…” No time to talk about The Elephant Man which I saw for the first time and loved far more than I expected to, Bodies Bodies Bodies which has the best ending to a slasher movie I’ve ever seen or Louis Moir’s absorbing art documentary A Brush with Comedy which follows Moir’s dad Jim, Spencer Jones, Miriam Elia, Bec Hill and stand-up cult hero Simon Munnery in an exploration of the relationship between art and comedy. But all highly recommended.
And no time at all to tell you what this is from. But it’s great.
Greyskin (Deixis Press) and Playtime’s Over (Propolis) are both available direct from their respective publishers, as well as from all the usual places, online and off. You can also support my work by buying Ray Adams’ self-published books, or by simply buying me a coffee. You can also pay for this free newsletter, if paying for free stuff is your jam.
I also review books on my website, most of which are available through my affiliate book shop on uk.bookshop.org - it’s a great alternative to certain online leviathans owned by Trump-supporting billionaires, and supports independent bookshops. Affiliates also get a % of books sold through them, so go have a look.
Nothing dramatic, just the most insufferable throat/cough/hot/achey/knackered seasonal malady.
Was going to say “ever written” but let’s be honest, that makes me sound way more accomplished than I am.
Both of them. Boom boom.
I have had one-star reviews for two of my books posted by a Good Reads account that was created only a few minutes before it one-starred me and five-starred a book I’d just two-starred. And they’ve not read much since…
If you really want to know, click here.
But not The Big Lebowski, that was David Huddleston. Took me years to realise they were two different old fat white men.