Jean Auel Gets the Smack-Down.

lkp · Nov 12, 2007

triceretops said:
...
I've written to her publisher with some polite, but direct questions. I don't know if I'll get any answers. This is an integrity issue for me, and it's quite disturbing, pushing me into a 5150 mindset. It almost seems like she got away with literary murder. But who the hell was standing there watching her commit murder, while rocking back and forth on their shoes and whistling Dixie?

...

Tri--going ten-seven.

Tri, let me get this straight. You haven't read Clan of the cave Bear. You haven't read Auel's latest book. In fact you haven't read any of her books. What you have read are reviews on Amazon, that bastion of objective and insightful book criticism.

And you're writing a letter to her publisher to complain about the quality of her last book. Which you have not read.

Can you explain to me how this makes sense? What am I not getting? If you do think this a more generalizable issue, shouldn't you be basing your complaint on the inferior later work of, um, someone you have read?

Tiger · Nov 12, 2007

Queen of Swords said:
In the next book, Ayla will visit Australia and domesticate a kangaroo.

No. She'll make a hang glider out of woven grasses that the men of the era will corrupt into an instrument of war.

chartreuse · Nov 12, 2007

triceretops said:
At this point I'm willing to believe and, or, speculate that this last installment (SoS) was rushed at the end of a 12-year period, certainly an incredible lapse of time. Granted she went to do research in France, but not for 12 years. There has been talk of a sixth book, alas nearly six years has passed and there is no concrete evidence that it's being penned, at least that I know of.

I stop in occasionally at the ECfans discussion board. One of Auel's kids gives us updates periodically, and as far as I've been able to glean there is no doubt whatsoever that she is working on the next book, which, like the others, is requiring a lot of research. Basically the "official" story is that she is working on it, there is no estimated release date, and nobody will get a heads-up as to when it is coming out until it is in the publisher's hands.

I guess when your series sells as well as this one does, you can get away with that.

Marian Perera · Nov 12, 2007

Tiger said:
No. She'll make a hang glider out of woven grasses

That gave me a Mystery Science Theater 3000 flashback.

KTC · Nov 12, 2007

lkp said:
Tri, let me get this straight. You haven't read Clan of the cave Bear. You haven't read Auel's latest book. In fact you haven't read any of her books. What you have read are reviews on Amazon, that bastion of objective and insightful book criticism.

And you're writing a letter to her publisher to complain about the quality of her last book. Which you have not read.

Can you explain to me how this makes sense? What am I not getting? If you do think this a more generalizable issue, shouldn't you be basing your complaint on the inferior later work of, um, someone you have read?

Wow. I was thinking the same exact thing, but I couldn't be bothered to type it into a thread that left me feeling extremely perplexed. I'm glad you did. I am WAY interested in hearing the answer. I read it Tri's initial post that there was no reading of said author. That was bizarre.

triceretops · Nov 12, 2007

Gak. Very good points and I stand guilty as charged. But I'm not trashing or bashing Jean. I had my roomate order CotCB for me yesterday, and I intend to thoroughly enjoy it. My letter was very, very polite, and I asked if Jean's health was okay. From some recent photos, she does not look so bright and shiny and I wondered about it. But I did ask what their reaction was to the negative reviews. No accusations--no bashing. And that's it.

My gripe, I'm sure is with Crown. Let's put aside all of the negative reviews on Amazon and everywhere else about this book. I've never read it, so that leaves me out of the discussion loop. Now, (from anybody who HAS read this book) do you believe it should have been released to the public as it was? Do you think this book was edited in a professional manner? I mean, primarily, a good content editing. I ask this because of the severity of the negative claims.

My point and reason for asking? Other than I have a voodoo doll on my desk that has "publishing Industry" written across its forehead and I'm always poised to ram a pin into it (LOL), and putting aside sour grapes, professional jealously, and vindictiveness, I'll admit straight up that nothing craps in my yard worse that seeing a publishing company toss moral turpitude right out the window and let anything go to print because it's a sure fire money-maker.

I know, I know. That's life, Tri, buck up and shut up because it's happening all across the board every day. And there's not a damn thing I can do about it. This case just seemed to hit me harder than most. The last thing I want in my own industry is to see ethics trampled on for the sake of unbridled capitalizm. This type of behavior, if it is indeed this prevelant, is just the type of fodder that the PA naysayers (and other doom-peddlers) are spewing about the conduct of the industry in general. "Hey, man, name brands can do whatever they want", and "It's all about the dollar and nothing else." "Only celebrities get published and wield the power." That kind of attitude disturbs me. Ya just as soon take me to the tree of woe and nail me to it.

I don't know about you, but my agent blisters my ass ruthlessly for committing any and all fouls in the craft. I'm metaphorically stripped naked and told I'm fat. If I'm not up to snuff, no editor will ever get the chance to see my work. Period. Case closed. He's my first line of defense. Then if I make the grade, an editor will be the next person to slash and burn, and I'll know I have that coming, too. My presentation to the public is going to be downright spiffy, and I'll at least have most of the basics and elments correct in my prose. Otherwise, I have no business with my fat little face on the back cover of a book, sitting on shelves from sea to shining sea.

Again, I have no right to comment on a book I haven't read. But after Frey, Viswanthan, and to a lesser Paolini (didn't read the books--only the articles and news stories), I felt a disturbance in the force that was unsettling. I don't wish to see this type of trend in the industry. Ever.

Sorry if I've perplexed, confused or insulted anyone.

Tri

chartreuse · Nov 12, 2007

triceretops said:
Now, (from anybody who HAS read this book) do you believe it should have been released to the public as it was? Do you think this book was edited in a professional manner?I mean, primarily, a good content editing. I ask this because of the severity of the negative claims.

Not just no, but HELL NO!

Whoever had the chance to read Shelters of Stone before it went to print, be it her agent, her editor, whoever, should have sat Ms. Auel down, handed her a good stiff drink, and just told her flat out that it needed a complete rewrite.

If that meant that the book would be delayed a couple of more years, fine. If that meant hiring a ghostwriter who was familiar with the storyline, fine. To this day, although I can (as you've seen) go on at length about WHAT was wrong with Shelters of Stone, I don't have an inkling as to WHY it was that way. Some people have suggested that Auel is simply tired of the story and didn't give it her full attention. Others have suggested that it wasn't even written by her.

I have no idea why the publisher allowed the book to come out, but I can tell you that if I were the publisher, SoS would never have seen the light of day in the version it did.

CheshireCat · Nov 12, 2007

Gak. Very good points and I stand guilty as charged. But I'm not trashing or bashing Jean. I had my roomate order CotCB for me yesterday, and I intend to thoroughly enjoy it. My letter was very, very polite, and I asked if Jean's health was okay. From some recent photos, she does not look so bright and shiny and I wondered about it. But I did ask what their reaction was to the negative reviews. No accusations--no bashing. And that's it.

Dunno if you realize it, but in these days of stalkers and such, asking such personal questions as those about an author's health or appearance are virtually guaranteed to land your letter in the Watch File. And, yes, I'm serious. It'll either go there or into the circular file. Especially if you referred to her as Jean.

My gripe, I'm sure is with Crown. Let's put aside all of the negative reviews on Amazon and everywhere else about this book. I've never read it, so that leaves me out of the discussion loop. Now, (from anybody who HAS read this book) do you believe it should have been released to the public as it was? Do you think this book was edited in a professional manner? I mean, primarily, a good content editing. I ask this because of the severity of the negative claims.

Okay. Say there are a few hundred "reviews" on Amazon raving about how bad the book is. Out of how many hundreds of thousands (or millions) of people who bought the book? What if they disagree? What if they loved the book?

I'm still wrestling with the bewildered question of why you have a "gripe" about this with anyone at all. Seriously.

My point and reason for asking? Other than I have a voodoo doll on my desk that has "publishing Industry" written across its forehead and I'm always poised to ram a pin into it (LOL), and putting aside sour grapes, professional jealously, and vindictiveness, I'll admit straight up that nothing craps in my yard worse that seeing a publishing company toss moral turpitude right out the window and let anything go to print because it's a sure fire money-maker.

And my point is that you don't know that's what happened. Even if the book is terrible (and I don't know; as I said, I read and enjoyed the first two in the series), her editor(s) may have loved it. Yes, seriously; people have their own opinions, and even if a few hundred people violently disagree, that doesn't make them right.

So you are questioning the integrity of a publisher based on the assumption that Amazon reviews were on the money, that other negative opinions were on the money -- both of which present the views of a tiny percentage of the readers who bought the book.

I know, I know. That's life, Tri, buck up and shut up because it's happening all across the board every day. And there's not a damn thing I can do about it. This case just seemed to hit me harder than most. The last thing I want in my own industry is to see ethics trampled on for the sake of unbridled capitalizm. This type of behavior, if it is indeed this prevelant, is just the type of fodder that the PA naysayers (and other doom-peddlers) are spewing about the conduct of the industry in general. "Hey, man, name brands can do whatever they want", and "It's all about the dollar and nothing else." "Only celebrities get published and wield the power." That kind of attitude disturbs me. Ya just as soon take me to the tree of woe and nail me to it.

Unbridled capitalism? Are you aware of the fact that the whole industry is run now based on the almighty profit line? Yes, you still find people in publishing who love writing and books and want to publish the best -- and most successful -- books they can. They want to earn prizes and acclaim and get movies made from the books they shepherd through the publication process.

And their bosses want to make lots of money. Because they're companies whose survival depends on the earning of profit.

All that said, you know what? Name brands pretty much can do what they want, because they've earned it. They've turned in work that has consistently topped bestseller lists and earned their publishers big bucks, and both achievements are appreciated.

So maybe Auel turned in the book and said, "Okay, I'm done with this one." And her editor at Crown read it and loved it, and sent it back with some notes -- and she revised. Maybe what everybody is trashing is a book that was edited, was revised, was a book everybody at Crown was happy with.

Or maybe she turned it in, said, "This is the book, I know it rambles and is repetitive and stuff, but it's what I want to say." (Hey, you don't know. Which is my point.) And her editor read it, and flinched a bit, but said, "You know, her loyal audience will probably love this, and she's already working on the next book and, well, she's not getting any younger and has more books we want her to write, so ... good enough."

Or maybe they knowingly published a book everyone concerned at Crown believed was horrible, because they were anxious to get another Auel book out there, and she was unwilling to revise, or because she never revises a finished book once she's begun another one, or because she's in a hurry to finish the series in her head and knows time is getting a bit short -- or whatever.

You have some choices there. Some more cynical than others. And somewhere in all that is probably the truth.

But, again, we're talking about a novel. And whether the industry routinely publishes bad books knowingly (I'd give you an argument there, except that it would end up right back where it should: one reader's lousy book is another's favorite one.) or always does their best is fairly well impossible to judge by this one book.

Tell you one thing, though. You can pretty well alienate a publisher with a holier-than-thou letter questioning their integrity.

I don't know about you, but my agent blisters my ass ruthlessly for committing any and all fouls in the craft. I'm metaphorically stripped naked and told I'm fat. If I'm not up to snuff, no editor will ever get the chance to see my work. Period. Case closed. He's my first line of defense. Then if I make the grade, an editor will be the next person to slash and burn, and I'll know I have that coming, too. My presentation to the public is going to be downright spiffy, and I'll at least have most of the basics and elments correct in my prose. Otherwise, I have no business with my fat little face on the back cover of a book, sitting on shelves from sea to shining sea.

In a perfect world, sure. Last time I checked, this world was filled with all kinds of unequal and unfair things. Your agent and editor will certainly do their best to see to it your work is all polished up and spiffy for its public presentation.

And if you had a different agent, and different editor, the polishing and spiffing would probably produce a different book.

As a matter of fact, I know it would, and you know it would -- because all this is subjective. What one agent sees as a drawback another sees as a plus. What one editor loves, another loathes. And in case you hadn't noticed, the "rules" governing all things right and proper in writing and publishing change on a regular basis and vary at any given moment from house to house.

Your debut book may well be polished and spiffed to within an inch of its little life, and then hit the market -- and earn hundreds of venomously negative "reviews" on Amazon.

Are you going to believe them? Is it going to matter to you that hundreds (out of the, we will hope, hundreds of thousand) of readers hate the work you spiffed and polished? Will you be moved to do something drastically different next time around -- because of them and because some aspiring writer sends your publisher a letter asking, basically, if you've one foot in the grave or still have all your marbles?

Or will you just keep working, because you've figured out the best methods for you, and your agent and editor are happy with what you're writing and, hey, so are you ...

Again, I have no right to comment on a book I haven't read. But after Frey, Viswanthan, and to a lesser Paolini (didn't read the books--only the articles and news stories), I felt a disturbance in the force that was unsettling. I don't wish to see this type of trend in the industry. Ever.

Sorry if I've perplexed, confused or insulted anyone.

Tri

And you're judging other writers' work by the news stories, articles, and reviews, huh?

No offense, but that pretty much undercuts your entire tirade. Because you're not even offering your judgments, only the published views and opinions of other people.

Saanen · Nov 13, 2007

What are reviews for if not to help others judge a work before putting time and effort into reading it?

Just sayin'.

KTC · Nov 13, 2007

Saanen said:
What are reviews for if not to help others judge a work before putting time and effort into reading it?

Just sayin'.

There is that. But you have to go with reputable sources. We're talking Amazon here. I could go bash someone right now just for kicks. They'll leave it up and someone will come along and read my review and say, "Frack it. I'm not reading that book." Go to a reliable source for your reviews. Although...I think this particular book was kicked by everyone.

CheshireCat · Nov 13, 2007

Saanen said:
What are reviews for if not to help others judge a work before putting time and effort into reading it?

Just sayin'.

If you want to choose what you read according to the opinions of strangers, not knowing anything about their background, experiences, tastes, preferences, education, or personal agenda -- have at it.

Plenty do. I feel sorry for them because other people have to tell them what to read, but, hey, that's just my opinion.

Me, I depend on what I feel when I read the cover copy, or I listen to friends whose tastes and preferences I know -- or I just take a chance and try something because I've done it before and in so doing discovered absolute gems.

Discovered Dick Francis that way.

Sure, I waste some time, and I've wasted some money on books I couldn't finish. But at least I don't open a book with other people's opinions on it muttering in the back of my mind.

I'd rather form my own.

And, by the way, anybody who believes they can please all those faceless, anonymous readers out there should probably find a different creative outlet and/or vocation.

Because you won't.

Red-Green · Nov 15, 2007

Saanen said:
What are reviews for if not to help others judge a work before putting time and effort into reading it?

Just sayin'.

Well said, too.

In fact, a particularly blistering negative review often intrigues me more than a glowing, pollyanna review. I mean, if a book made someone that mad, perhaps it's worth a peek.

triceretops · Nov 15, 2007

The last time I checked, readers DRIVE this industry. They are the ones who pop out of the wordwork and take the time to express their views on the internet boards and review sites. They are the ones who plop down $28 bucks for a hardcover, without blinking an eye. They are the fans that determine whether or not you'll rise to the top or sink into obscurity.

I'm going to listen to them, and although I'm not ready to gulp down everything they say or feel about my book, I'm going to give them their space to express their emotions and viewpoints. I'll take that information into consideration with a cocked eyebrow--not a holy roadmap for my ultimate decision making.

And, by the way, anybody who believes they can please all those faceless, anonymous readers out there should probably find a different creative outlet and/or vocation.

Correction:

Anybody who doesn't listen to all those faceless, anonymous readers out there should probably find a different creative outlet and/or vocation. Readers are the lifespring from which writers flow. Readers are the top of the food chain in this business. The writers, the bean counters, and the editors are greatly affected by what the readers think.

Tri

CheshireCat · Nov 15, 2007

And, by the way, anybody who believes they can please all those faceless, anonymous readers out there should probably find a different creative outlet and/or vocation.

Correction:

Anybody who doesn't listen to all those faceless, anonymous readers out there should probably find a different creative outlet and/or vocation. Readers are the lifespring from which writers flow. Readers are the top of the food chain in this business. The writers, the bean counters, and the editors are greatly affected by what the readers think.

Tri

You know what? You can disagree with me -- but don't "correct" me. I've been in this business a long time, and I've heard from tens of thousands of readers over the years. I read every piece of mail, on paper or courtesy of the internet. And most of the readers who write to me get a polite and friendly response.

What I said stands. You WILL NOT please every reader.

But good luck with that.

triceretops · Nov 15, 2007

The correction was my belief only. I do whole heartily agree with you that we cannot please all of the readers. And I competely understand your point.

You seem to be very, very angry with me for sponsoring this discussion about Jean's book. I'm not here to hurt anybody's feelings or drag an author's name through the mud. And I highly respect your opinion and would never question your background.

I'll ask that this thread be closed.

Tri

CheshireCat · Nov 15, 2007

Doesn't matter to me whether the thread is closed or continues on.

As for being angry with you -- angry is too strong a word. I said I was baffled, and I continue to be baffled, that you chose to begin a discussion about a book you had not read, your views entirely based on "reader reviews" at Amazon.

That, really, is what disturbs me. And it still does.

A bunch of readers on a forum doing that -- Yeah, sure, I see that all the time. Doesn't surprise me a bit.

But writers should know better. We should give our peers the benefit of the doubt, especially when the bulk of the "criticism" is anonymous and comes from a source like Amazon.

There's a new site, by the way, called (I believe) writersarereaders.com. Something like that. They're asking published writers to submit reviews of other writers' work. It'll be interesting to see if that idea takes off.

I can tell you one thing. The reviews aren't anonymous.

MacAllister · Nov 15, 2007

Honestly, I don't see any reason to close the thread. I think you guys can agree to disagree, and let it go in civilized fashion.

CheshireCat · Nov 15, 2007

I think you're right.

ChunkyC · Nov 16, 2007

Let me just say that reading Valley of Horses gave me an inferiority complex.

I read Clan, and Valley, and that was enough. While the historical stuff was quite intriguing, I got tired of reading about the sexual escapades of this Jondalar with the inhumanly huge shlongdalar. For that reason alone, Clan was a much better book, imo.

As for the current book, it's a shame she's getting raked over the coals. Crits of the work itself are one thing, but if peeps are attacking her as it seems some are, that's not fair at all. The most wonderful human on Earth might write the worst book in history, just as the most vile person to ever live might write a phenomenally good book. Each (book or author) should be judged on their own merits.

WittyandorIronic · Nov 17, 2007

Soo...I noticed this same refrain elsewhere. lol. But why would I want to read about the sexual escapades with the inhumanly SMALL shlongdalar? BOR-ing! I mean...you can argue the necessity of sex (though I would disagree with you in these books, as I thought it was integral) but you really can't argue about the necessity of a large "manhood". In fiction, it really is a required character trait. lol.

ChunkyC · Nov 17, 2007

For me, the sex in Valley seemed ridiculous, more like letters to Penthouse than a historical depiction of what the sex lives of ancient humans might have been like. Just about every sex scene was reminiscent of a 20th century fantasy. The tribe looking for a suitably endowed man to deflower one of their young virgins while the elders all look on from the shadows ... gimme a break. I saw that scenario acted out in a porn film at my brother's stag party a decade before Clan was published.

That sort of thing threw me right out of the story.

sandyn · Nov 17, 2007

My goodness! All these words over one book. If one person could write a book that appealed to ALL readers, there would be no need for any other writer to exist.

There are all kinds of books out there that don't interest me. As for Jean Auel, I have read some of hers. They appealed to me at the time. Tastes change and that's what makes the world go round so far as reading goes, IMHO.

It's a big world out there...

Matera the Mad · Mar 5, 2008

I found this thread by accident, looking for something else -- with a straight-out Google, yet -- and had to take a peek. And a laugh. Some of the disgruntled members of the ECFans.com forum would love to read it.

Yeah...I enjoyed Clan of the Cave Bear, thought that the slobbering pink porn of Valley of Horses was pasted in to please someone (certainly not me!), and when the long-awaited SoS came before my jaded eyes I said WTF.

For fun I wrote a fake mini review at another fan site:

"A long and fascinating look into the customs and culture of our prehistoric ancestors. This book will satisfy the most demanding reader's hunger for detail."

I then translated it to:

"Unfocussed head-hopping ramble that would have benefitted from a little planning and some severe editing"

Appalachian Writer · Mar 5, 2008

I read CLAN OF THE CAVEBEAR many, many years ago. I remember it as a long trudge. I even saw that horrible movie version. What I do remember (but you know how age affects writers) is that she received a three figure advance for the book which was extraordinary for the time.

Paichka · Mar 5, 2008

I loved this thread.

When I was a kid, I read CotCB, VoH, tMH and PoP voraciously. The Mammoth Hunters was my favorite of them.

The first time I read SoS, I was disappointed. I just didn't think it was as interesting as the others. (I thought Ayla was too perfect and Jondalar is whiny) On the second reading, I actually enjoyed it a bit more -- it's not the best of the series by any means, but it's entertaining enough for what it is. (Stephen King put it best in Bag of Bones -- the books are "sex among the cave people" epics)

To be fair, I've never read any of her books with a writer's perspective. Ever since coming to this site, I've found myself much more nitpicky about flaws in books, which is slightly frustrating. If I read them now, I might not like them as well.

I just enjoy the books the same way I read Johanna Lindsey's enslaved-woman-makes-captor-fall-in-love-while-having-kinky-bondage-sex books. Recognize the flaws, but try to enjoy the story anyway.

Jean Auel Gets the Smack-Down.

AKA: "Gums of Steel"

starting over

Stand in the Place Where You Live

Mostly purring. Mostly.

Stand in the Place Where You Live

Mostly purring. Mostly.

KoalaKoalaKoala!

Mostly purring. Mostly.

Mostly purring. Mostly.

'Twas but a dream of thee

Mostly purring. Mostly.

It's hard being green

It's hard being green

AW Aficionado

Bartender, gimme a Linux Mint

Somewhere in the hills....

The BIC-Believer