PDA

View Full Version : When Is the Author's Big Mistake Not a Mistake?



AnneMarble
12-16-2006, 07:29 PM
For those who haven't heard of this phrase before, the Author's Big Mistake (a term I gleefully swiped from Uncle Jim) is responding to a review.

But this one isn't the usual "author has tantrum about bad review" kerfuffle. In this instance, the author really has a case. Because...

She didn't complete the novel before the scheduled publication date. So when the harsh review was published, the book hadn't been written yet!!!
:Wha:

I wish I had a link. Well I do, but it's in Swedish <g>:
http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=1353&a=597936&previousRenderType=6

If we have any Swedish or Swedish-reading members here, I'd love to know more about this case. :D

victoriastrauss
12-16-2006, 08:13 PM
A journalist wrote an unflattering article about Michael Crichton (who apparently has been getting attention from the Bush administration for his debunking of global warming). Crichton Tuckerized (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuckerization) the journalist, writing him into his new book as a minor character who's a pedophile (http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002156.php).

- Victoria

Carmy
12-16-2006, 10:37 PM
LOL Well done Michael Crichton.

AnneMarble
12-17-2006, 12:03 AM
LOL Well done Michael Crichton.
Eh. It's not like he never got a bad review before. Writers should expect bad reviews -- it comes with the territory. Besides, let's face it... sometimes the reviewers are right. (cough cough)

OTOH I do think it's funny that George Lucas secretly named a two-headed monster in Willow "Siskel and Ebert" because he was upset at their reviews. And I don't have an issue with the moviemakers who have named villains "Siskel," "Ebert," "Kael," or whatever. But I also think they'd do better by looking at their movies and wondering if the reviewer might be (gasp) right. And there's a difference between a two-headed monster named Siskel and Ebert (or a bad guy named Kael) and naming a pedophile after a reviewer you disagree with.

victoriastrauss
12-17-2006, 01:28 AM
The only comfort of childish, petulant behavior like Crichton's is that it makes him look worse than the other guy.

- Victria

Rolling Thunder
12-17-2006, 01:35 AM
Add to that the obvious slander and someone besides Crichton is going to end up with a pig payday in court.

Willowmound
12-17-2006, 03:36 AM
For those who haven't heard of this phrase before, the Author's Big Mistake (a term I gleefully swiped from Uncle Jim) is responding to a review.

But this one isn't the usual "author has tantrum about bad review" kerfuffle. In this instance, the author really has a case. Because...

She didn't complete the novel before the scheduled publication date. So when the harsh review was published, the book hadn't been written yet!!!
:Wha:

I wish I had a link. Well I do, but it's in Swedish <g>:
http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=1353&a=597936&previousRenderType=6

If we have any Swedish or Swedish-reading members here, I'd love to know more about this case. :D
That's outragous.

I do read Swedish. The reviewer -- who'd butchered this book he hadn't read -- says in the article (my translation may not be terribly good):

"I had my fun with Britt-Marie Mattsson [the writer] in advance, as I dislike her so very much. But let's hope the book will be published so that I'll get the chance to butcher it properly."

:Jaw:
Excuse me? This man should be groveling, not making quips. Fired too.

PeeDee
12-17-2006, 04:58 AM
I was not at all impressed with Michael Crichton's stunt. It's really petulant. It's amusing for Stephen King to write a real person into his book as someone who gets killed by Zombies, because it was part of a fund-raiser for the CBLDF, whcih makes it okay. Crichton was just being a child. He's pretty far down on my list now, next to Clive Cussler, who is much much lower.

JennaGlatzer
12-17-2006, 05:10 AM
Excuse me? This man should be groveling, not making quips. Fired too.

I so agree. How could anyone ever trust his reviews again if he'd stoop that low? Gross.

I'm so glad you speak Swedish. I tried running the article through a translator and it was totally unintelligible.

Bartholomew
12-17-2006, 06:07 AM
This is my translation of the webpage.

[Brackets] are phrases I'm not sure about. This is a compilation of what I recognize from other languages. I tried to make it make sense in English without changing the meaning much. I don't speak Swedish, or even read swedish, but I recognize a lot of root words from other languages I speak, so I thought I'd try to make the article available, even if its pretty much a hack job.

Author's unwritten book [torn apart.]

Now it's happened again. Judgments have [appeared] where the critic has not [bothered to read] of the [that which] he wrote about.

[There's a reference to time which I cannot understand. I believe it is equivalent to: "This just in."]

Kerstin Hallert spoke with Afton Blade when she blamed S.V.T.'s [value-frigate [I'm assuming this is some kind of department--the paper appears to have some kind of pirate theme.]] for “tame questions” before the first [copy of the book] had been sent.

Now Helsingborg Daily's critic has, moreover, of the [author] Kristian Lundberg, [put forth a critique about a book] that doesn't exist.

Britt-Marie Mattsson's detective stories “The Dread Power” existed with in Pirate Team's autumn folder with a short document report, but Mattsson had time to never to [write] the book.

Last Sunday, Kristian Lundberg had [an official] overview in Helsingborg Daily. He types: “I have read [1/50th] of the [novel]. I perhaps should not have done this”.

[A bit further] in the text he bashed Mattsson's book: “Mattsson is sly and stylish, unfortunately this isn't enough - the plot is predictable, the character's steriotypical”.

Pirate Team's Mattias's Boström says:

"[It certainly happens that] critics [flame] books, [we know this, but know we know that he's a lair.]

Helsingborg Daily's, culture manager Gunnar Bergdahl says:

"We will have a [formal] apology [for] Britt-Marie Mattsson. Kristian Lundeberg also will ask for an apology."

Kristian Lundberg tells the Swedish book trade: "I had my fun with Britt-Marie Mattsson and I hate her. But let's hope the book will be published so that I'll get the chance to [flame it] properly."

Helsingborg Daily's have taken down the article about Mattsson from their homepage. The text exists however in the paper newspaper and in a pdf file that is still downloadable.

Willowmound
12-17-2006, 07:11 AM
Bartholomew, that was a fascinating translation! I mean that, very well done for someone who doesn't speak the language.

I don't speak it myself, per se, but I can read it. Here's a full translation (I kept Bart's heading -- it's a good translation):


Author's unwritten book torn apart.

Now it's happened again. Judgments have been passed without the critic reading that which he wrote about.

Recently, Kerstin Hallert was fired from Aftonbladet [newspaper] after having accused SVT's [Sweden's national broadcaster] election commentators of "[something] questions" prior to broadcasting the first program.

Now Helsingborg Dagblad's [a newspaper] critic, [something] crime author Kristian Lundberg, has managed the feat of critiquing a book that does not exist.

Britt-Marie Mattsson's crime [novel] "The Power of Fear" was represented by a short synopsis in Piratförlaget's [a publisher] autumn catalogue, however Mattesson never found the time to write the book.

Last Sunday, Kristian Lundberg presented an overview of crime [novels] in Helsingborgs Dagblad. He writes: "I have read some fifty of this autumn's crime novels. I shouldn't have."

Further down, he bashes Mattsson's book: "Mattsson is a solid stylist [i.e. her style is solid], unfortunately that isn't enough - the plot is predictable, the characters stereotypical."

Piratförlaget's Mattias Boström says:

"It certainly happens that critics skim books, we've felt that for some time. But this time we know how it [the critique] really came about."

Helsingborg Dagblad's culture editor, Gunnar Bergdahl, says:

"We will be giving Britt-Marie Mattsson an unconditional apology. Kristian Lundberg will also be making an apology."

Kristian Lundberg tells Svensk Bokhandel [book industry magazine]: "I had my fun with Britt-Marie Mattsson [the writer] in advance, as I dislike her so very much. But let's hope the book will be published so that I'll get the chance to butcher it properly."

Helsingborg Dagblad has removed from their website the paragraph referring to Mattsson. The text remains, however, in the paper edition, as well as in a pdf-file that is still available for download.

ATP
12-17-2006, 08:04 AM
For the record, is it possible we can get an 'approved' or 'official' or 'final' translation?

This is dynamite.

And, to answer the OP, in this instance, I think that it most certainly is NOT a mistake to respond to the critic when a) the book synopsis is all that presently exists and b) the critic's personal feelings have been made so transparent, to the point that he has admitted to carrying this prejudice through to the as-yet unpublished book.

Bartholomew
12-17-2006, 08:25 AM
Bartholomew, that was a fascinating translation! I mean that, very well done for someone who doesn't speak the language.

I don't speak it myself, per se, but I can read it. Here's a full translation (I kept Bart's heading -- it's a good translation):

*CHOP!*



Thank you! And I simply love what you've done with the translation! ;) It makes a lot more sense now.

Celia Cyanide
12-17-2006, 10:12 AM
I was not at all impressed with Michael Crichton's stunt. It's really petulant. It's amusing for Stephen King to write a real person into his book as someone who gets killed by Zombies, because it was part of a fund-raiser for the CBLDF, whcih makes it okay. Crichton was just being a child.

This was brought up in TIO, and I'm glad it came up in this forum, too. It's apalling, IMO. Writers may base their worst characters on people they know and hate. It's cathartic. But those characters are usually personal to the author. To use a person's real name just to publicly humiliate them is immature. The subject matter is far too disgusting to be funny. The pedophile has little bearing on the story, according to the article I read. I don't appreciate an author sticking in a character who doesn't belong there just to use his readers as tools in his personal feud.

I think it has been decided that an author responding to factual inaccuracies is accepable. And if a reviewer wrote a review before the publication date, surely that counts?

Tracy
12-17-2006, 04:42 PM
I was told on good authority that here in Ireland a book was thrashed by a critic in hardback, but by the time the paperback came out, the same critic (clearly forgetting they'd reviewed it before), gave it a wonderful review!

aruna
12-17-2006, 05:03 PM
One of my books was trashed in Guyana recently. My mother was infuriated and told me to respond. I haven't even read it and I'm probably not going to.

victoriastrauss
12-17-2006, 07:01 PM
I'm absolutely positive that the Booklist reviewer who reviewed my last two books didn't read them. The reviews aren't negative, but they're stupid, and give a completely wrong impression of the books. Did it piss me off? I have to admit, yes--not just as an author, but as a reviewer (I despise reviewers who don't carefully read the books they review, even if they hate them). Will I do or say anything about it, other than privately grousing to close friends? No. It would be childish and unprofessional. Bad, dumb, misguided, and even malicious reviews go with the territory. If you put yourself out there, you've got to be prepared for whatever comes.

- Victoria

AnneMarble
12-17-2006, 07:26 PM
This (http://www.thelocal.se/5818/20061215/) is from an English-language Swedish paper. But I wouldn't have been able to Google it without the translations of the articles I read. Thanks for all the help. :D

Edited to Add:
The reviewer is quoted as saying that he "got worked up in advance about Britt-Marie Mattsson because I detest her so very greatly. But let's hope the book is published so I get the chance to say it for real."
:crazy:

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 03:00 AM
The reviewer is quoted as saying that he "got worked up in advance about Britt-Marie Mattsson because I detest her so very greatly. But let's hope the book is published so I get the chance to say it for real."
:crazy:

Yeah, that's a slightly better translation than mine :)

PeeDee
12-18-2006, 04:05 AM
This was brought up in TIO, and I'm glad it came up in this forum, too. It's apalling, IMO. Writers may base their worst characters on people they know and hate. It's cathartic. But those characters are usually personal to the author. To use a person's real name just to publicly humiliate them is immature. The subject matter is far too disgusting to be funny. The pedophile has little bearing on the story, according to the article I read. I don't appreciate an author sticking in a character who doesn't belong there just to use his readers as tools in his personal feud.
I think it has been decided that an author responding to factual inaccuracies is accepable. And if a reviewer wrote a review before the publication date, surely that counts?

I wouldn't even respond for factual fallacies. Maybe if I maintained a blog, or something of the sort, and someone wrote in and mentioned it. Then I might. Otherwise, just let people say what they want to say. Why take it personally? I don't throw a fit when someone doesn't listen to the same music as me, so why should I blow a gasket just because they don't like the same books as I do? Even if it happens to be my book?

Maybe they'll like the next thing I write. Maybe not. Mostly, it's out of my hands, I just have to write the next thing.

(this, in regards to Michael Crichton. The Swedish reviewier is on his own.)

ATP
12-18-2006, 06:43 AM
I think it interesting that the majority of commentators here haven't responded to Anne Marble's post and question. Or,have done so by answering in relation to Michael Crichton (no bearing on the OP), or in general, not responding to critics per se (a previous thread).

Anne has given notice of something particularly important. To reiterate:

- the said Swedish critic/ reviewer made caustic comments about a
book synopsis (the book is, apparently, still being written)

- the same said Swedish critic/ reviewer has made his prejudices so
transparent as to indicate that the same view will be carried over to the
book when it has finished being written and published.

Anne's question via the thread title was when is the ABM not a ABM? While the reviewing 'profession' is generally held in as high esteem as a snakeoil salesman, this Swedish reviewer has not only taken things to a new low, he is positively a cancer. Not only within the reviewing 'profession', but the publishing industry as a whole - domestically and internationally.

His conduct has gone far beyond the generalised miserable attitudes of caustic reviewers or those who 'haven't taken the time to read the book carefully'. I say to you again, he is a positive cancer to writers and reviewers alike. I say that like all cancers that can be found in time, he should be quickly and judiciously excised. I call on the members here to make their views known in the strongest manner to the Swedish publisher, and call for the reviewers immediate sacking.

ETA:

Newspaper carrying the original article: Helsingborg Dagblad
Reviewer/critic: Kristian Lundberg
Newspaper website: http://hd.se/
Culture Editor and Lundberg's boss:
Gunnar Bergdahl - gunnar.bergdahl@hd.se

JennaGlatzer
12-18-2006, 06:58 AM
You know, that's not a bad idea. Except that most of us don't speak Swedish. ;)

Willowmound, I'd be glad to e-mail the editor of that paper if you feel like translating this (or something close to it) for me:

It's inexcusable for your reviewer Kristian Lundberg to have criticized a book he has not read. I hope you will take the appropriate action and fire this reviewer; how can your readers ever trust him again, knowing he would let his vindictiveness get in the way of doing his job?

Bartholomew
12-18-2006, 07:43 AM
Willow, How'd I do? :D


Den är oförlåtlig för din recensent Kristian Lundberg att ha kritiserat en bok som han inte har läst. Jag hoppas dig skar taken lämplig och avfyrar denna recensent. Hur kan dina avläsare någonsin lita på honom igen och att veta att han skade. At hans oförsonlig få i långt av att göra hans jobb?


(I wouldn't use this. I'm pretty sure its incoherent. But I had fun doing it.)

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 07:43 AM
Jenna, most Swedes speak English. English is a primary school subject in all Scandinavian countries. Just email them.

I'm afraid I wouldn't know how to translate anything into Swedish. I'm Norwegian. Once upon a time our languages were the same (1000 years ago or so). They're still similar enough for a speaker of either to comprehend the other. It doesn't mean I can actually make Swedish sentences. I'd translate into Norwegian for you (which a Swede would understand), but as I said, they all speak English. :)

ATP, I'm afraid Mr. Lundberg hasn't taken anything to a 'new low'. When I got my journalism degree, we did as part of it some course work in reviewing. While never stated explicitly, it was more than hinted at that there were ways in which the processs could be...umm...sped up.

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 07:53 AM
Willow, How'd I do? :D


Den är oförlåtlig för din recensent Kristian Lundberg att ha kritiserat en bok som han inte har läst. Jag hoppas dig skar taken lämplig och avfyrar denna recensent. Hur kan dina avläsare någonsin lita på honom igen och att veta att han skade. At hans oförsonlig få i långt av att göra hans jobb?
(I wouldn't use this. I'm pretty sure its incoherent. But I had fun doing it.)
Haha! Made me laugh. But in an impressed sort of way.

As I've stated above, I'm not Swedish.

That said, your first sentence looks 100% correct. Well done. The second one, not so much. :)

I like the way you have translated 'fire' directly. You're pretty much asking that the reviewer be fired from a cannon or a very large gun. And why not? He certainly deserves it!

'Avläsare' in the next sentence should be 'läsare'. After 'och' everything pretty much comes apart, sorry :)

Which languages do you actually speak?

WildScribe
12-18-2006, 07:56 AM
Bart and Willow, you guys are awesome. ;)

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 07:58 AM
Thank you, I'm sure you are too...

JennaGlatzer
12-18-2006, 08:00 AM
Jenna, most Swedes speak English. English is a primary school subject in all Scandinavian countries. Just email them.

OK, I'll do that.

Now, anyone know which person to e-mail? Says his editor is Gunnar Bergdahl, but I don't see an e-mail for him.

ATP
12-18-2006, 08:02 AM
Willow,

I am not denying what your journalism course instructed/taught, either implicitly or explicitly. This however begs the question: did it advise or suggest that reviews could/ought be done on the basis of a) an as-yet unwritten/incomplete book and b) the only part of the book generally available to the trade (let alone the reading-buying public) is the synopsis in the publisher's catalogue?.

Irrespective of whether it is a 'new' low or 'old' low, given the above circumstances, which are quite extraordinary, I think that the point should be made in no uncertain terms to the said newspaper editor and publisher.

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 08:12 AM
OK, I'll do that.

Now, anyone know which person to e-mail? Says his editor is Gunnar Bergdahl, but I don't see an e-mail for him.

All I can find is the paper's general email address: redaktionen@hd.se

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 08:16 AM
Irrespective of whether it is a 'new' low or 'old' low, given the above circumstances, which are quite extraordinary, I think that the point should be made in no uncertain terms to the said newspaper editor and publisher.

Oh, I agree. I'm neither defending nor condoning. I'm just saying there's more dodginess in this business than people maybe suspect. The news in this story isn't that the reviewer did it -- it's that he got caught doing it.

ATP
12-18-2006, 08:28 AM
Now, anyone know which person to e-mail? Says his editor is Gunnar Bergdahl, but I don't see an e-mail for him.

Is it possible that the Dagens Nyheter editor and the (ex?) Swedish Film Festival Director share the same name?

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 08:31 AM
I was wondering that too. It could be the same person.

Edited to say: ...you mean Helsingborg Dagblad, of course, not Dagens Nyheter.

Bartholomew
12-18-2006, 08:32 AM
Haha! Made me laugh. But in an impressed sort of way.

As I've stated above, I'm not Swedish.

That said, your first sentence looks 100% correct. Well done. The second one, not so much. :)

I like the way you have translated 'fire' directly. You're pretty much asking that the reviewer be fired from a cannon or a very large gun. And why not? He certainly deserves it!

'Avläsare' in the next sentence should be 'läsare'. After 'och' everything pretty much comes apart, sorry :)

Which languages do you actually speak?

I determined to either suggest we fire her from a cannon, or else stuff her into a very large tuna-tin--Canned. Yok yok yok. Still, I'm impressed that I managed to make a sentence make sense. So the grammar is a LITTLE like german, but has a sort of Old English twist? I'd have to see what I did wrong to be able to tell.

I speak English, Spanish, German, and Japanese, all at varying levels of competency, depending on the positions of the stars, my mood, and to whom I am speaking. I'm also well acquanted with Sanscrit, Pali, Old English and Latin. I can bluff my way through Italian with some level of believability, before I look like an utter moron, and I can impress Kenyans with my modest vocabulary of Swahili words. I love languages.

I know a little Chinese and a little French, and a little bit of a ton of different languages, but none of these count.

ATP
12-18-2006, 08:35 AM
Willow,

If you haven't already, could you look at the links below, and especially the second? They might point you (and others) in the right direction.

Newspaper website: http://www.dn.se/
Contacts at the paper:www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=602&a=6738 (http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=602&a=6738)
(you'll need to scroll about 3/4ths down the page - section in grey on the left)

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 08:42 AM
I determined to either suggest we fire her from a cannon, or else stuff her into a very large tuna-tin--Canned. Yok yok yok. Still, I'm impressed that I managed to make a sentence make sense. So the grammar is a LITTLE like german, but has a sort of Old English twist? I'd have to see what I did wrong to be able to tell.

I speak English, Spanish, German, and Japanese, all at varying levels of competency, depending on the positions of the stars, my mood, and to whom I am speaking. I'm also well acquanted with Sanscrit, Pali, Old English and Latin. I can bluff my way through Italian with some level of believability, before I look like an utter moron, and I can impress Kenyans with my modest vocabulary of Swahili words. I love languages.

I know a little Chinese and a little French, and a little bit of a ton of different languages, but none of these count.
Now I am impressed.

Scandinavian grammar tends to be simpler than German, while slightly more complicated than modern English.

On Old English: I heard recently (apparently it's a new theory) that while Old English words are Germanic (from the Angles and the Saxons), OE grammar was to a large extent Celtic. Which has led to the suggestion that the Anglo-Saxon 'invasion' may have been more a cultural thing than a military takeover; that the numbers of Angles and Saxons crossing and settling perhaps weren't that great. Germanic was simply 'in', and the Britons just adopted more and more words, while sticking with their old Celtic grammar.

Now that's Off Topic if I ever saw it.

BTW, the Swedish reviewer is a man.

ATP
12-18-2006, 08:43 AM
I was wondering that too. It could be the same person.

Edited to say: ...you mean Helsingborg Dagblad, of course, not Dagens Nyheter.

At this point, I can't be sure. I am only drawing an inference - my information to date indicates that DN is the newspaper, while HD could be the section within the said newspaper, or a separate paper in and of itself.

Bartholomew
12-18-2006, 08:44 AM
Willow,

If you haven't already, could you look at the links below, and especially the second? They might point you (and others) in the right direction.

Newspaper website: http://www.dn.se/
Contacts at the paper:www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=602&a=6738 (http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=602&a=6738)
(you'll need to scroll about 3/4ths down the page - section in grey on the left)

Chefredaktör och ansvarig utgivare:


Thorbjörn Larsson thorbjorn.larsson@dn.se

ansvarig utgivare is the editor held to legal responsibility for the publication of any sort of rag; magazines, papers, etc. Chefredaktör is literally "Director." So he's in charge of some sort of liability department? The people listed below him are his subordinates, I'm guessing.

Stf ansvarig utgivare, redaktionschef Allmänna redaktionen Pia Skagermark
pia.skagermark@dn.se

...I'm not sure about this one, since it has an acronymn I don't recognize, but I think that editor has to do with Public Relations, so I'm pretty sure thats who you'd email.

EDIT

Yeah, nevermind, wrong paper.

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 08:44 AM
Willow,

If you haven't already, could you look at the links below, and especially the second? They might point you (and others) in the right direction.

Newspaper website: http://www.dn.se/
Contacts at the paper:www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=602&a=6738 (http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=602&a=6738)
(you'll need to scroll about 3/4ths down the page - section in grey on the left)

Unfortunately, that's the wrong paper!

It's Helsingborg Dagblad, here: http://hd.se/

Bartholomew
12-18-2006, 08:48 AM
Now I am impressed.

Scandinavian grammar tends to be simpler than German, while slightly more complicated than modern English.

On Old English: I heard recently (apparently it's a new theory) that while Old English words are Germanic (from the Angles and the Saxons), OE grammar was to a large extent Celtic. Which has led to the suggestion that the Anglo-Saxon 'invasion' may have been more a cultural thing than a military takeover; that the numbers of Angles and Saxons crossing and settling perhaps weren't that great. Germanic was simply 'in', and the Britons just adopted more and more words, while sticking with their old Celtic grammar.

Now that's Off Topic if I ever saw it.

BTW, the Swedish reviewer is a man.

But he has such a nomme de femme. C'est la vie. Does Swedish have words that distinguish gender by default, by the way, as per "Der, Die, Das," or "Amigo, Amiga," or "Actor, Actress?"

Yes, yes, it is off topic. I warn everyone with every post that I *am,* in fact, going to derail this thread. They never see it coming.

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 08:48 AM
At this point, I can't be sure. I am only drawing an inference - my information to date indicates that DN is the newspaper, while HD could be the section within the said newspaper, or a separate paper in and of itself.

Here's what's what:

The phony review was published by Helsingborg Dagblad (HD).

The article linked to in the original post of this thread, is from Dagens Nyheter (DN).

The article in DN tells of the misdeeds of the HD's reviewer.

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 09:02 AM
But he has such a nomme de femme.

What, Kristian? But it's exactly the same as Christian!


Does Swedish have words that distinguish gender by default, by the way, as per "Der, Die, Das," or "Amigo, Amiga," or "Actor, Actress?"
Yes. Though it's a little complicated (for non-Scandos). There is no word equivalent to English 'the'. Instead, the ending of a word signifies whether one is referring to 'a thing' or 'the thing'. And this ending varies according to gender.

So, in German, 'cat' is female; eine Katze (a cat), die Katze (the cat).

In Norwegian, cat can be either female or male (why this is so is too comlicated to get into here). If we treat it as female, you'd say:

Ei katte (a cat), katta (the cat).

Or dog (always male):

En hund (a dog), hunden (the dog).

ATP
12-18-2006, 09:05 AM
Here's what's what:

The phony review was published by Helsingborg Dagblad (HD).

The article linked to in the original post of this thread, is from Dagens Nyheter (DN).

The article in DN tells of the misdeeds of the HD's reviewer.

The HD link lists the various contacts at the paper. Any willing to translate?

http://hd.se/info/2006/10/24/helsingborgs-dagblad/

Also found toward the bottom of this page is what appears to be an article concerning an interview with Lundberg himself about this incident...

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 09:14 AM
The HD link lists the various contacts at the paper. Any willing to translate?

http://hd.se/info/2006/10/24/helsingborgs-dagblad/

Also found toward the bottom of this page is what appears to be an article concerning an interview with Lundberg himself about this incident...

Pefect! This is culture editor Gunnar Bergdahl's email: gunnar.bergdah@hd.se
He would be the one to complain to.

And there is indeed an article with an interview toward the bottom.

Lundberg says:

"Oj, det har strömmat in mejl, vissa är rena hatmejl i stil med "vi har alltid vetat vilken skitstövel du är". Jag har säkert fått 100 mejl..."

My translation:

"Wow, emails have been pouring in, some verging on hate-mail, of the kind 'we've always known what a bastard you are'. I must have received more than 100 emails..."

ATP
12-18-2006, 09:24 AM
Hmmm... it would be good to know what Lundberg himself had to say
in full? And, only around 100 e-mail...? (so far, that is...;) and most likely from within Sweden or Scandinavia)

Bartholomew
12-18-2006, 09:39 AM
What, Kristian? But it's exactly the same as Christian!


OHHH! I was seeing it as "Kirsten" for some reason. I guess my eyes are playing tricks on me.



Yes. Though it's a little complicated (for non-Scandos). There is no word equivalent to English 'the'. Instead, the ending of a word signifies whether one is referring to 'a thing' or 'the thing'. And this ending varies according to gender.

So, in German, 'cat' is female; eine Katze (a cat), die Katze (the cat).

In Norwegian, cat can be either female or male (why this is so is too comlicated to get into here). If we treat it as female, you'd say:

Ei katte (a cat), katta (the cat).

Or dog (always male):

En hund (a dog), hunden (the dog).

That makes perfect sense to me, though I'd be hard-pressed to say why. Foible-ish lingual rules never really confuse me. Idioms do, and mostly the English ones, but thats a different topic.

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 09:54 AM
Speaking of idioms, the Swedes excell at rude ridiculous ones, and in this interview (http://hd.se/inrikes/2006/12/16/kristian-lundberg-det-haer-aer-min/), Lundberg describes the episode as 'being caught with his dick in the butter'. (Oh, the Swedes... :) )

The gist of the interview is, he says he's sorry, he complains that he's never had any reactions before and alludes that 'some people' have it in for him; says that the published review was merely a place holder, and that he sent it to the editor by mistake. Also, he reiterates that he really does hate this author, Mattsson.

JennaGlatzer
12-18-2006, 10:11 AM
Pefect! This is culture editor Gunnar Bergdahl's email: gunnar.bergdah@hd.se

Damn. Bounced. I'll try adding in the "l" and seeing if that works...

ATP
12-18-2006, 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willowmound
Perfect! This is culture editor Gunnar Bergdahl's email: gunnar.bergdah@hd.se

Originally Posted by JennaGlatzer
Damn. Bounced. I'll try adding in the "l" and seeing if that works...

Adding the ‘l’ at the end of bergdahl seems to do the trick...

JennaGlatzer
12-18-2006, 10:59 AM
Yep. At least, hasn't bounced yet.

ATP
12-18-2006, 11:03 AM
Lundberg describes the episode as 'being caught with his dick in the butter'.

The gist of the interview is, he says he's sorry, he complains that he's never had any reactions before and alludes that 'some people' have it in for him; says that the published review was merely a place holder, and that he sent it to the editor by mistake. Also, he reiterates that he really does hate this author, Mattsson.

This critic / reviewer apparently castigates a synopsis, while in the course of things revealing his patent prejudice toward this particular author. Then, after the backlash, he plays both the 'conspiracy' and 'it was a mistake' cards. Yet, in the end, he appears to contradict this, by reiterating his disdain for the author. He can't have it both ways.He seems to have a few personal issues, and/or very bad at estimating the effects of his bad PR.

Willowmound
12-18-2006, 11:08 AM
I'd say that's a fair summation.

ATP
12-18-2006, 11:29 AM
I'd say that's a fair summation.

From my estimation - and if the recent Judith Regan saga is anything to go by - (given that Lundberg's stature and money earning power are significantly less) the backlash, and the critic's statements and actions will become an increasing embarrassment and liability for the HD publisher and editor. In the end, they will have no choice but to fire him.

ATP
12-18-2006, 11:45 AM
If anyone here who has been reading the events wishes to contact Gunnar Bergdahl, Mr. Lundberg's boss and editor,may do so at the following e-mail address -

Gunnar Bergdahl's email: gunnar.bergdahl@hd.se (gunnar.bergdahl@hd.se)

victoriastrauss
12-18-2006, 07:45 PM
I'm just saying there's more dodginess in this business than people maybe suspect. The news in this story isn't that the reviewer did it -- it's that he got caught doing it.I agree.

His promise to trash the book once it's published is just as unethical. Doing a review solely because you hate the author is really low.

- Victoria

ATP
12-18-2006, 08:13 PM
I agree. His promise to trash the book once it's published is just as unethical. Doing a review solely because you hate the author is really low.

The idea of pointing this out to Lundberg's editor doesn't appeal, Victoria?

Celia Cyanide
12-18-2006, 08:15 PM
Doing a review solely because you hate the author is really low.

It's an insult to the author as well as the readers. We count on reviewers for a fair an honest opinion. If it's just a personal grudge, why should I pay attention?

aruna
12-18-2006, 08:17 PM
One of my books was trashed in Guyana recently. My mother was infuriated and told me to respond. I haven't even read it and I'm probably not going to.

[/QUOTE]

Today, the snail mail copy of this article arrived. I had refused to read it for almost a week because I was afraid of what it might say. My mother was extremely upset by it.
But today I gathered the courage and read it.
And I feel so good. It was actually a very well-balanced and fair article. It said good things, and spoke of flaws. I was always aware of the flaws - the book was unfortunately rushed through to a very tight deadline. I found I could read the review without taking it personally, and even agree with some of the points the writer made. There is only one correction I would make - in that he referred to one of the characters as a Buddhist monk, when he was in fact a Hindu monk. I think I'm going to write the reviewer to thank him.

Bartholomew
12-18-2006, 08:34 PM
I think I'm going to write the reviewer to thank him.

I'd let well enough alone, myself.

AnneMarble
12-18-2006, 08:42 PM
ATP, I'm afraid Mr. Lundberg hasn't taken anything to a 'new low'. When I got my journalism degree, we did as part of it some course work in reviewing. While never stated explicitly, it was more than hinted at that there were ways in which the processs could be...umm...sped up.
I really hope cases like this are rare, and I'm sure they are. At least among respectable reviewers. That's not to say some reviewers don't have "issues." Reviews of genre fiction in certain venues are always doomed because it's obvious the reviewer doesn't like the genre and was expecting to hate the book. Those are grey area cases. But bashing a book that doesn't exist, and admitting you can't wait for the book to be finished so you can bash it for real, is a special case. :rolleyes:

I can't speak to newspapers, magazines, etc. All have different guidelines, and you can tell the good reviews from the bad. I used to review books for a web site, and we had standards. I always read the books. So did the other reviewers. (You can tell when you read the reviews because of the level of detail!) We were asked ahead of time what types of books (and authors, too, I think) we hated so that we didn't get stuck reviewing a subgenre we wouldn't be fair to. Also, if an author got a certain number of negative reviews, her books were removed from future consideration.

One thing I'm worried about is that people will look at this case and think it "proves" what they knew all along -- that the reviewers aren't really reading the books. Aargh! Real reviewers deserve better than to be tarred with that brush.

Alex Bravo
12-18-2006, 09:07 PM
That is terrible of the reviewer to write something without reading the entire work. There must be dozens of books that may even start out slow, and then work magic later. Two of the books that come to mind are Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, and Battlefield Earth. JK's second book, I felt wasn't living up to the first at all and I was really disappointed, until the diary began to write back, and then JK's magic started coming on strong again. Battlefield Earth, well, the beginning of that book is just plain terrible. I didn't even know why I was reading such, um, junk. Everything seemed weak, the names, the plot, the situations, the stereotypes; but I kept going and I'm glad I did, because the second part of the novel just blew me away with creativity and imagination. To me, it was like reading two different works...

victoriastrauss
12-18-2006, 09:12 PM
The idea of pointing this out to Lundberg's editor doesn't appeal, Victoria?No, I think that's a great idea. I'm just agreeing with the observation that Lundberg's behavior isn't an isolated instance.

Here's an interesting article (http://dir.salon.com/story/books/feature/2002/07/24/peck/index.html) about writers giving other writers bad reviews.

- Victoria

AnneMarble
12-18-2006, 09:20 PM
That is terrible of the reviewer to write something without reading the entire work. There must be dozens of books that may even start out slow, and then work magic later. ...
But this reviewer didn't even start to read the book. This book is a special case, and the review is a headcase. The book was listed in the catalog with a summary, but it wasn't even written yet.

:Jaw:

Here's an interesting article (http://dir.salon.com/story/books/feature/2002/07/24/peck/index.html) about writers giving other writers bad reviews.
Those reviews can be bizarre. I wonder if they count as reviews or as soap operas. ;) What is one to think when the editors go to a writer known for having a feud with Author B and ask for a review of Author B's latest book? :D Ironically, those same editors probably think themselves "above" watching a soap opera. Exactly. They create them instead.

Doug Johnson
12-19-2006, 12:29 AM
I'm absolutely positive that the Booklist reviewer who reviewed my last two books didn't read them. The reviews aren't negative, but they're stupid

. Will I do or say anything about it, other than privately grousing to close friends? No.

Your secret is safe with me and all your other close friends here .;)

jsh
12-19-2006, 03:22 AM
Dear Sir—

It has come to my attention that you have published a rather negative review of my latest novel, a novel that does not yet exist. I must say that you have provided me with a great opportunity shared by few, if any, other authors.

While we authors sometimes tend to think of ourselves as perfect artists, sadly, we aren't. It is all too frequent for one to publish a book, only to find out after the fact that the plot was puerile drivel, the characters cardboard simpletons, and the plot twists clichè "doo-doo". Please take my word when I say that this phenomenon is often the apotheosis of frustration.

In your wisdom, you've offered a pre-emptive review from which I can plan changes to my manuscript in progress, and thereby avoid the mistakes I would have made. Puerile is exactly what I will ensure my plot isn't; my characters will be fleshy and insightful; my plot twists will resemble more Shinola® than that other substance. And, regarding the personal animosity, I shall donate a fiver to the charity of your choice!

Warmest regards,

John Q. Author

ATP
12-19-2006, 04:17 AM
Despite the human and electrical energy spent on this particular thread, and the expressions of dismay etc., there will be no action taken by the vast majority of members here. I can understand the inaction in this regard from those members here who write in one of a number of Scandinavian languages. And, I understand other, native-English speakers/writers will not do so for a number of reasons, ranging from at best, 'enlightened self-interest', to mere disinterest. I shouldn't be surprised.


Yet, I contrast this with the amount of energy and pixels expended in relation to an earlier thread concerning a certain US-based agent's casual comments pasted on her blog. Is there something here that I am missing...?

JeanneTGC
12-19-2006, 05:53 AM
Despite the human and electrical energy spent on this particular thread, and the expressions of dismay etc., there will be no action taken by the vast majority of members here. I can understand the inaction in this regard from those members here who write in one of a number of Scandinavian languages. And, I understand other, native-English speakers/writers will not do so for a number of reasons, ranging from at best, 'enlightened self-interest', to mere disinterest. I shouldn't be surprised.

Yet, I contrast this with the amount of energy and pixels expended in relation to an earlier thread concerning a certain US-based agent's casual comments pasted on her blog. Is there something here that I am missing...?

I don't think I understand your point. Are you saying that the Scandanavian authors on this board would and should be excused from wanting to write in and complain? Why would that be? And, my related question would then be, if authors local to the issue are not willing to write in, why would it be more shocking that writers who are NOT local have less of an interest in writing in? Why would this particular issue be any different from any issue out there -- in almost all cases, it's a minority who speak up, not a majority, and those most affected versus those relatively unaffected.

Can't comment on the agent/blog issue, since I have no idea of what you're talking about there without a name or an issue called out. I can, however, ascertain from reading this entire thread, that some posters already have sent in an email of complaint. If you're trying to rally the troops to do more, perhaps a suggested "blurb" that we could all use to ensure we're complaining about the correct thing to the correct person would be more helpful than insinuating that no one cares or will take any action.

Willowmound
12-19-2006, 06:58 AM
I'm not gonna be making any waves before I'm published.

Nor am I exactly local to the issue, geographically. Linguistically maybe, but Australia is a fair ways away from Scandinavia.

NCRomanceWriter
12-19-2006, 06:16 PM
Off topic I know, but I just had to comment.


...Battlefield Earth, well, the beginning of that book is just plain terrible. I didn't even know why I was reading such, um, junk. Everything seemed weak, the names, the plot, the situations, the stereotypes; but I kept going and I'm glad I did, because the second part of the novel just blew me away with creativity and imagination. To me, it was like reading two different works...

If you believe the Scientology critics, it was. While L. Ron Hubbard is not by any means an author I like, I thought Battlefield Earth had some good parts. It reminded me of a very rough draft that was sped to publication - it had some potential that was never fully realized. Maybe I'll rewrite it someday just for fun.

On the other hand, the movie just plain stunk.

ATP
12-19-2006, 07:57 PM
Fine.

Alternatively, you might consider sending a personal/direct reply to the desired recipient of your post, or starting a new and separate thread.

Thanks.

priceless1
12-19-2006, 10:12 PM
I'm absolutely positive that the Booklist reviewer who reviewed my last two books didn't read them.
This happened with one of our books. It wasn't a bad review, just a non-review because they literally spit out everything that was in our sell sheet. Upon seeing the review, I went to the highest level and gave them the "what gives?" My reason for doing so is because they request every single copy of our books for review. If I'm going to cough up a book at their request, I feel I have some bitching rights.

He looked into the bogus review and sent me a very chagrined email stating that this was a new reviewer and promised he would personally review the book. He then went on to say that he could only give the book "about an hour or so of his time." Huh? He calls that a review? When I questioned this, he said that they receive thousands of books, and this was the best they could do. Okay, this reviewer doesn't have the weight of PW, LJ, or Booklist, but I have seen their blurbs on the covers of some very well-known authors' books.

I talked with several reviewer friends of mine, and they were appalled. That this happens doesn't necessarily surprise me - little does anymore. That he admitted it to me, however, does. Needless to say, I've crossed them off my review list.