[poll id=”8″]

This is one of the issues that came up with the whole Decadent debacle. A lot of authors blog, or use LibraryThing or GoodReads, and a lot of that nifty Web 2.0 content* they’re generating happens to be in review form.

So at what point does doing so become a professional concern? I’ve tried to list the obvious points on a potential scale above. I think most people would agree that personal relationships should at least be disclosed, but I’ve seen several arguments for not reviewing at all over the past few weeks. These range from variations on ‘The Cult of Nice’** to the idea reviews take time away from ‘real’ writing. One of the more common arguments is that writing negative reviews of contemporary authors’ books (especially in the same genre) could be construed as jealousy or an attempt to sabotage their sales. Another line taken is that it may harm your chances with the publisher or editor of the reviewed book.

A lot of these arguments had never even occured to me. I’d probably avoid an explicit review of an author from the same publishing company, though I’d still click those little stars. Though I don’t know all of Loose Id’s authors personally, I do chat to some of them on the author loop, and I’m not sure I’d be comfortable giving an honest review (I tend to believe no review is better than a dishonest review).

Peer review is massively important in other forms of publishing, but in fiction, it seems, people get a bit squeamish. Do reviews carry more weight for you if they’re by an author, or less? If you are/were published, where do you draw the line, and why?

*Sorry, was talking about 2.0 the other day. Mainly as in ‘why would people providing the content your site relies on be willing to pay you for the privilege of doing so?’ It’s got to be worth the user’s while. Anyway, digression for another time.

** “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.” It seems common in most tight-knit genres, but Romance does appear to be particularly bad for it.