Can Authors Give Negative Book Reviews?

The other day, I was scanning Goodreads and came across what appeared to be a not-so-nice review of a fairly well-known author's book. Upon closer inspection, however, I realized it was actually a rather scathing indictment of the author's reaction to negative reviews in general. According to the reviewer, the author was warning other aspiring authors to not give negative ratings to books, since it could damage their budding careers in the long run. If you bash an author's book and later want that author to write a blurb for you, for example, forget it.

Now, I won't give either the reviewer's or the author's names, since I can't confirm the accuracy of any of this information. However, I don't think names matter much in this scenario anyway. I'm far more interested in the opinions that were raised in this exchange. 

The reviewer, along with others who left comments, seemed to have the attitude that authors who get negative reviews should put on their "big kid undies" and chunk it up as part of the business. The consensus was that no author has the right to tell people whether or not to leave negative reviews, whether those people are aspiring writers themselves or not.

Hmm. Interesting. I can't say I've ever thought about book reviews in quite this way before. I've always known that they held tremendous power for writers, but I never thought how that influence may come at a price. To be honest, the entire thing has me questioning some of the book reviews I've written myself.

While I'm not a book blogger by any means, I am a fairly avid reader and I have a couple of reviews up on Goodreads at the moment...along with millions of other people. So, I had to wonder: Are authors really out there scanning for reviews like mine, ones that may or may not have been favorable to them? If I criticize an author's prose, plot or character development, will that really come back to bite me once my own work of art is published?

Well, here's my take on the matter: I believe in the Golden Rule---treating others as you wish to be treated---but I also believe in honesty. The same freedom of speech that allows you to write a book in the first place is the same freedom of speech that allows me to examine that book with a critical eye if I wish. It is our right and duty as intelligent readers to think critically about what we read, not just swallow it down without digesting it.

That said, there's no reason for us to be petty and ugly when we offer our criticism. Whether we believe it or not, every published author slaved over the words we read, polishing and fine-tuning to make them as perfect as possible. And for that, they deserve our respect, not our insults and ridicule. We can disagree with their work without devaluing them as people, and that's an important distinction to make. At the end of the day, I think it's a compromise we can all live with.

What do you think? Do aspiring authors have the right to publicly criticize the work of their peers? If so, is there a way to do it respectfully? Can popular book reviewers be honest in their reviews, or has it become "politically correct" to only post positive reviews?

My First Book Review! Lockdown (Escape From Furnace 1) by Alexander Gordon Smith

I've never done a book review before, but I figure 4 years spent writing essays as an English major in undergrad makes me fairly qualified for it. Methinks the book review will be considerably more fun ;-) Alrighty then, let's get started! Here's the lowdown on Lockdown: Escape from Furnace 1 by Alexander Gordon Smith:

Fourteen-year-old Alex Sawyer is the bully on the playground you were terrified of as a kid---lunch money stealer and all. He and his best friend Toby make it a habit to break into peoples' homes and steal whatever strikes their fancy. One night, however, their heist turns lethal when Toby is gunned down in cold blood by gigantic men in black suits and creepy strangers wearing gas masks. Alex didn't do it, but with no one to back up his story, he's found guilty of the murder and sentenced to life in Furnace Penitentiary, the world's worst maximum-security prison for teenage criminals.

On the surface, Furnace is kind of like a teen version of Oz; the days are long, the work is hard and the food is terrible. There are a few minor differences, though, like the seriously gross-looking mutant dogs that run around hoping for a bite (or ten) of human flesh. There's also the blood watch siren that sounds at night, which causes kids to get snatched from their beds and disappear. So yeah, Alex wants out, and he's determined to find a way to escape. There's only one problem: no one has ever escaped from Furnace.

Okay, let's start out with the positives. First of all, the book is chock-full of tension. I had a moment in the bookstore when I was trying to decide between this book and another one that was pretty similar. The reason this one won out was because it hooked me like a baited fish right from the first line. The opening scene has Alex running for his life with mutant dogs hot on his tail, and it sets your pulse pounding as if you're right there in the prison with him.

That brings me to the second main strength of the book: great imagery. Smith does an excellent job making the world of Furnace come alive for his readers. You can literally feel the heat in the air, taste the grainy, disgusting prison slop and hear the wild shrieks of the gas-masked creatures echoing in the night. Reading it is truly an intense and viseral experience.

Now it's time to discuss the novel's weaknesses. Although I enjoyed the page-turning aspects of the story, I was turned off by Smith's tendency to spell everything out for his readers. Remember the old adage, "Show, don't tell"? Well, Smith does a heck of a lot of telling in the story. When every other sentence drives home just how horrendously evil and awful Furnace is, that's just overkill. I know the guards are mean; you don't need to use the words "malicious" and "cruel" every time you describe them, you know?

This flaw made the characters problematic for me as well. I never felt any real connection to most of them because they were all put in boxes. As in, characters A, B and C are good, while characters X, Y and Z are eeeeevil. Alex was the exception, an anti-hero if you will, but I would've preferred if all the characters had been that way. It was too black and white; I needed more shades of gray.

The Bottom Line: If you're looking for a fast-paced thriller that doesn't require you to think too much, Lockdown is for you. It wasn't fabulous and it wasn't terrible, just pretty decent. There were some frightening supernatural elements in it, so it's not for the kidlets, but anyone middle-school aged and above should be okay.

Lockdown is the first book in the Escape From Furnace trilogy, with Solitary and Death Sentence due out in 2010 and 2011 in the U.S. (both are already available in the UK). I'm interested in seeing how things pan out Alex and his friends.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars (worth grabbing on PaperBackSwap.com)

Time for sharing now. What do you think of my very first ever book review? Love it? Hate it? Utterly indifferent? Let me know your thoughts!