# Reviewing your own work?!



## Schrody (Jan 2, 2014)

Okay, so I was "surfing" on Goodreads, and there I found an interesting book, but what's even more interesting is that I saw author not only reviewing his own book, but rating it, with, of course, five stars (so, the highest rating). What do you think about that? Are you the same? I thought those two things are a big no-no in an author's world. :-s


----------



## popsprocket (Jan 2, 2014)

That would be enough to make me walk away from a book. It's a big no-no in my eyes at least.

It's kind of like high-fiving yourself and then giving yourself a round of applause for doing so successfully.


----------



## Potty (Jan 2, 2014)

popsprocket said:


> It's kind of like high-fiving yourself and then giving yourself a round of applause for doing so successfully.



This is frowned upon? Balls.


----------



## popsprocket (Jan 2, 2014)

Potty said:


> This is frowned upon? Balls.



[video=youtube;yIL8RM_IWNY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIL8RM_IWNY[/video]


----------



## ppsage (Jan 2, 2014)

Better to read a book whose author has given it one star?


----------



## Schrody (Jan 2, 2014)

popsprocket said:


> That would be enough to make me walk away from a book. It's a big no-no in my eyes at least.



It sounds interesting, but it is kinda turn off :neutral:



popsprocket said:


> It's kind of like high-fiving yourself and then giving yourself a round of applause for doing so successfully.



Or liking your Facebook status. 



ppsage said:


> Better to read a book whose author has given it one star?



No, you shouldn't review your own work. But, that's my opinion. I think most people agree.


----------



## ppsage (Jan 2, 2014)

Authors worth reading can't be egotistical maniacs?


----------



## Potty (Jan 2, 2014)

ppsage said:


> Authors worth reading can't be egotistical maniacs?



That's pretty much what I'm basing my future as a writer on. I have the ego thing down pat so the rest should just happen if I've understood this correctly.


----------



## popsprocket (Jan 2, 2014)

Have you ever met a good author who thinks that they're the bees knees? Even if they know they are good at writing they always have something of their own that they hate or are unsure of.

The only writers who think they rock are twelve-year-olds and people who, in actuality, suck at writing.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 2, 2014)

ppsage said:


> Authors worth reading can't be egotistical maniacs?



Every author has an ego, but this is little too much for me. I don't know. I may be wrong. I'm still gonna read his book.


----------



## dale (Jan 2, 2014)

i personally wouldn't review my own book. it would look cheesy and disingenuous. if i ever did, i would probably not have much good to say about it, as 
my writing tends not to fulfill what i have in my mind as "5 star". if i were to give myself a great review....that would mean i had reached the apex 
of what i consider my potential. i'd consider it a very bad day to give myself a good review.


----------



## Potty (Jan 2, 2014)

popsprocket said:


> The only writers who think they rock are twelve-year-olds and people who, in actuality, suck at writing.



Well I obviously can't suck at writing so I must be young at heart. Love you pop!


----------



## Schrody (Jan 2, 2014)

popsprocket said:


> Have you ever met a good author who thinks that they're the bees knees? *Even if they know they are good at writing they always have something of their own that they hate or are unsure of.*



This is totally me.



popsprocket said:


> The only writers who think they rock are twelve-year-olds and people who, in actuality, suck at writing.



There is some truth in this. But, as we know, you can still be famous even with bad writing.


----------



## popsprocket (Jan 2, 2014)

Potty said:


> Love you pop!



Somehow it never occurred to me that people would shorten popsprocket down to pop and pops. Makes me feel like a grandfather.


----------



## Potty (Jan 2, 2014)

popsprocket said:


> Somehow it never occurred to me that people would shorten popsprocket down to pop and pops. Makes me feel like a grandfather.



Put your teeth back in and speak up.


----------



## J Anfinson (Jan 2, 2014)

I don't care how interesting the book sounds, I'd pass. People like that are the reason self publishing has a bad rap.


----------



## Gyarachu (Jan 2, 2014)

How is the book being published? Self-publishing or traditional? If traditional, what size company? I only ask to make you consider that perhaps the author is under exceptional circumstances. Maybe s/he is unemployed with a family to support and is desperately trying anything that might increase book sales? Or something like that, I don't know. I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

If it sounds interesting I'd give it a chance. The book is not the author.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 2, 2014)

J Anfinson said:


> I don't care how interesting the book sounds, I'd pass. People like that are the reason self publishing has a bad rap.



True.



Gyarachu said:


> How is the book being published? Self-publishing or traditional?



I don't know, but he seems to be indie writer. Edit: he has a publisher.



Gyarachu said:


> Maybe s/he is unemployed with a family to support and is desperately trying anything that might increase book sales? Or something like that, I don't know. I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.



Maybe he is, but I don't think he understands he's doing more damage than good.



Gyarachu said:


> If it sounds interesting I'd give it a chance. The book is not the author.



It does sound interesting. But how many people would tolerate that?


----------



## Gyarachu (Jan 2, 2014)

> Maybe he is, but I don't think he understands he's doing more damage than good.



That's pretty much irrelevant though. Does it at all alter the content of the work?



> It does sound interesting. But how many people would tolerate that?



Again, the review exists independently of the book. It doesn't change how good the writing is. It may change the way _you_ read it, but that's only if you let it.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 2, 2014)

Gyarachu said:


> That's pretty much irrelevant though. Does it at all alter the content of the work?



I'll know it when I read it. Yeah, it's irrelevant to us, but if he's not making sales because of that... it is relevant.



Gyarachu said:


> Again, the review exists independently of the book. It doesn't change how good the writing is. It may change the way _you_ read it, but that's only if you let it.



I think it affects more the decision to read that book than the way you read it.


----------



## dale (Jan 2, 2014)

Gyarachu said:


> That's pretty much irrelevant though. Does it at all alter the content of the work?
> 
> 
> 
> Again, the review exists independently of the book. It doesn't change how good the writing is. It may change the way _you_ read it, but that's only if you let it.



but imo....the book would be more appealing to me with 0 reviews, then nothing more than 1 review by the author his/herself. 
if i was desperate for just any old review to be put up.....i would have at least had a friend or associate do it. and i would even feel "icky"
about doing that. i want my book to have a reputation for having appeal to READERS. not just appeal to me.


----------



## spartan928 (Jan 2, 2014)

I don't even bother reading five star reviews. In fact, I tend to hone in on the one star reviews 90% of the time. Much more interesting. I agree it's a foolish and strange move for an author to make, but its just one review. Disregard it and peruse the others. If its a decent piece of writing, I'd expect there to be plenty of diverse, objective reviews to browse through to see if the writing is worth your time. If there are three reviews and one is the author's (the other two likely being the author's mother and aunt), expend your reading time at your own risk.


----------



## Gyarachu (Jan 2, 2014)

> I'll know it when I read it. Yeah, it's irrelevant to us, but if he's not making sales because of that... it is relevant.



I don't think I was very clear, sorry. I meant whether or not he is hurting his own sales doesn't change the quality of the book. You're right that it is an important lesson for people to learn, though.



> I think it affects more the decision to read that book than the way you read it.



True. But I also think that it could make people read it more critically. I know it would probably do so for me, at least a little bit. I'm not trying to force you to read anything, I'm just saying it's possible there is another side to things.



> but imo....the book would be more appealing to me with 0 reviews, then nothing more than 1 review by the author his/herself.



Agreed, just saying that if you can read through it then I encourage people to do so.


----------



## Terry D (Jan 2, 2014)

To me a self review screams AMATURE. I have solicited reviews for my books from people who have bought them, but I always phrase the request the same way; "If you have the time and the desire, I would appreciate an honest review of (enter book title here) on Amazon." I don't know how much reviews help, or hurt, sales but I like the feedback.


----------



## J Anfinson (Jan 2, 2014)

dale said:


> i want my book to have a reputation for having appeal to READERS. not just appeal to me.



Exactly. I suppose my earlier comment may have come across a little harsh, but if you look at the complaints of those in the traditional field, unethical reviews are one of the things that affect the entire perception of the indie industry, which would also include vanity publishers. I have no idea if this person is using one of those vanity publishers or not, but if they're having to acquire their own reviews then I would imagine that would be the case. Reviewing your own book or having family members give you a good review just seems so dishonest to me. I'd rather my book stand by it's own merits and succeed or fail based on that. At least that way if it totally sucks I can learn from it and people might give me a second chance.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Jan 2, 2014)

I wouldn't review myself, and I wouldn't read a book by someone who has.  Heck, I won't even read a book if its opening line/paragraph ticks me off.  I make exceptions if other people speak strongly enough in favor of the book in question, but let's face it: If you're reviewing your own work, there's probably no one else to speak for you.



Schrody said:


> Every author has an ego, but this is little too much for me. I don't know. I may be wrong. I'm still gonna read his book.



Then apparently it isn't a little too much for you, if you're going to read the book anyway.



Terry D said:


> To me a self review screams AMATURE.



So amateur, it's not even spelled correctly.   (Unless that's the point, in which case, whoosh. <_<)


----------



## bookmasta (Jan 3, 2014)

Rating your own work is a terrible idea. Its hard for authors to be objective of their own work. Beta readers exist for a reason.


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 3, 2014)

Schrody said:


> Okay, so I was "surfing" on Goodreads, and there I found an interesting book, but what's even more interesting is that I saw author not only reviewing his own book, but rating it, with, of course, five stars (so, the highest rating). What do you think about that? Are you the same? I thought those two things are a big no-no in an author's world. :-s



I LOL'd... What kind of narcissist would feel the need to do such a thing? - It reminds me of what Fred Perry (tennis) used to say to his opponents: 'I wouldn't like to be playing me today'. - The difference being, Perry had earned the right to say that.

What I think is one step beneath that, is when friends / colleagues give a distorted and over-enthusiastic opinion of someone's work. - I can see why that would be done, but it also suggests that the writer's talent is not sufficient to stand up unaided.

I'd find it far easier to accept I was a crap writer than to receive undeserved praise.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

spartan928 said:


> I don't even bother reading five star reviews. In fact, I tend to hone in on the one star reviews 90% of the time. Much more interesting. I agree it's a foolish and strange move for an author to make, but its just one review. Disregard it and peruse the others. If its a decent piece of writing, I'd expect there to be plenty of diverse, objective reviews to browse through to see if the writing is worth your time. If there are three reviews and one is the author's (the other two likely being the author's mother and aunt), expend your reading time at your own risk.



First review is author's and below are others. 



Gyarachu said:


> I don't think I was very clear, sorry. I meant whether or not he is hurting his own sales doesn't change the quality of the book.



It probably doesn't, but how many readers has he lost because of his reckless act?



Gamer_2k4 said:


> Then apparently it isn't a little too much for you, if you're going to read the book anyway.



It's not that terrible, I laughed, but had I been in a different mood, or didn't like the idea... it would be a big deal. 



Gavrushka said:


> I LOL'd... What kind of narcissist would feel the need to do such a thing?



Narcissist.  Maybe he failed Marketing 101. Maybe he doesn't know that's a no no. Maybe he got really crappy advice.


----------



## escorial (Jan 3, 2014)

desperate people do desperate things...but maybe in his world it sits ok.


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 3, 2014)

I have this delightful vision of him, after an intimate episode with his partner, rating his performance as she stares at him in disbelief. Yes, without a doubt he lives in a different world to the rest of us!


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

Gavrushka said:


> I have this delightful vision of him, after an intimate episode with his partner, rating his performance as she stares at him in disbelief. Yes, without a doubt he lives in a different world to the rest of us!



Maybe his world is better than ours XD It's his first and only book, but just because he's a "beginner" doesn't mean he's allowed to such elemental mistakes. I mean, he is, but to his own damage.


----------



## Potty (Jan 3, 2014)

Schrody said:


> just because he's a "beginner" doesn't mean he's allowed to such elemental mistakes. I mean, he is, but to his own damage.



It's how you learn. The first thing I ever wrote was a 2k word short story which I thought was so brilliant I sent 15 copies off to publishers directly telling them that if they wanted more work of that quality I would be happy to indulge. I also sent it off to the Bridport comp expecting to win. That was about 6 years ago and the work was substandard even for a junior high student. I had no idea at all and looking back I still flush red in the face. 

No doubt the fact he's reviewed his own work might put some people off, but I suspect he will realise the error of his ways in time and it will make for a funny story when he is being interviewed by radio 4 one day.


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 3, 2014)

@Schrody: LOL! I'd agree... And perhaps he felt such immense pride at completing his first work that he was compelled to review it. - He's one up on me, regardless; I've never published anything.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

Gavrushka said:


> @Schrody: LOL! I'd agree... And perhaps he felt such immense pride at completing his first work that he was compelled to review it. - He's one up on me, regardless; I've never published anything.



Neither have I, but I read a lot about self publishing and marketing. Maybe he just wasn't prepared.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

Potty said:


> It's how you learn. The first thing I ever wrote was a 2k word short story which I thought was so brilliant I sent 15 copies off to publishers directly telling them that if they wanted more work of that quality I would be happy to indulge. I also sent it off to the Bridport comp expecting to win. That was about 6 years ago and the work was substandard even for a junior high student. I had no idea at all and looking back I still flush red in the face.
> 
> No doubt the fact he's reviewed his own work might put some people off, but I suspect he will realise the error of his ways in time and it will make for a funny story when he is being interviewed by radio 4 one day.



When I read my stories from high school, it makes me laugh. Why? Because it's really bad. It's poorly written. Ideas were good, but I didn't know how to shape them. Now, years after, my writing evolved, and I can say that I will be even better with time (I think that's the normal process for almost every writer), so I know how you feel.

You learn by making mistakes. Question is, does he really know he's making a mistake? Maybe I should contact him? But then again, he's more experienced in publishing, I'm not.


----------



## Potty (Jan 3, 2014)

Schrody said:


> But then again, he's more experienced in publishing, I'm not.



I'm more experienced at a medical diagnosis than someone who missed the episode of House that I watched. Doesn't mean to say I know anything about it. Just because he's managed to publish doesn't mean he knows anything about it. If you do decide to contact him I would be very tactful and try not to some across 'Holier than thou' otherwise you might just end up looking like a flamer or some such. Personally I would leave it, I think you mentioned he had a publisher? Really it should be up to the publisher to pull him up on it.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

Potty said:


> I'm more experienced at a medical diagnosis than someone who missed the episode of House that I watched. Doesn't mean to say I know anything about it. Just because he's managed to publish doesn't mean he knows anything about it. If you do decide to contact him I would be very tactful and try not to some across 'Holier than thou' otherwise you might just end up looking like a flamer or some such. Personally I would leave it, I think you mentioned he had a publisher? Really it should be up to the publisher to pull him up on it.



I know, I know, but he might take it like as an assault, what do I know and such. I mean, I don't care what he thinks, but if I'm going to help someone, I'm doing it in a good manner, I don't need someone to trash me. He has a publisher, it's Event Horizon Press, but I think it's more of a "platform" for self publishing. Don't know. But what if he don't realize his mistake, and do the same thing with his second book? Yes, it's not my problem, but I know I'd liked if someone gave me advice on something like that.


----------



## Potty (Jan 3, 2014)

If you think it's the right thing to do then do it. It might work out great. This a choice you'll have to make


----------



## Whisper (Jan 3, 2014)

This is not something I would do, but I don't have a problem with a writer reviewing his own work as long as he makes it clear he's the writer and he's not trying to pass himself off as someone else. It has to be clear. Additionally, was it a review or was it just another place he could tell people what the book was about? It's actually a smart idea if all you're doing is explaining the book, as many people start with the reviews than work backwards. This never made sense to me, but some people do it.


----------



## Potty (Jan 3, 2014)

Lets have a link.


----------



## Whisper (Jan 3, 2014)

spartan928 said:


> I don't even bother reading five star reviews. In fact, I tend to hone in on the one star reviews 90% of the time.



This is unfair. Peoples tastes differ. So, if I don't like Dune and give it a 1 star and say it's a crap storty, you pass? Also, there are plenty of people that just like to be mean for no reason other than they like to be mean.


----------



## Terry D (Jan 3, 2014)

Event Horizon Press looks to be a sort of clearinghouse for self published works. It is not a publishing house. If you go to the site and look at their list of titles offered most are from Createspace; Amazon's self publishing subsidiary. Looking at the 'sample chapters' page showed some pretty ragged prose.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

Potty said:


> If you think it's the right thing to do then do it. It might work out great. This a choice you'll have to make



I know.



Whisper said:


> This is not something I would do, but I don't have a problem with a writer reviewing his own work as long as he makes it clear he's the writer and he's not trying to pass himself off as someone else. It has to be clear. Additionally, was it a review or was it just another place he could tell people what the book was about? It's actually a smart idea if all you're doing is explaining the book, as many people start with the reviews than work backwards. This never made sense to me, but some people do it.



True, he is just describing his work, but he also gave his book top rating. 



Potty said:


> Lets have a link.



Ooops... it seems that if you're not registered at Goodreads, you won't see it (I tested it with another browser). Let me give you a screenshot.  Edit: seems like we're friends on Goodreads, that's why I couldn't see it in another browser where I'm not registered.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

Terry D said:


> Event Horizon Press looks to be a sort of clearinghouse for self published works. It is not a publishing house. If you go to the site and look at their list of titles offered most are from Createspace; Amazon's self publishing subsidiary. Looking at the 'sample chapters' page showed some pretty ragged prose.



That's what I thought.


----------



## Terry D (Jan 3, 2014)

I found the book on Amazon and quickly scanned the 'Look Inside' preview. It is written better than I expected (although he does seem to mix metaphors). The cover and layout are obviously amateur, but not distracting, and the story seems interesting.


----------



## Kyle R (Jan 3, 2014)

I'm guessing reviewing his own work is an attempt at increasing sales. Nothing wrong with that.

Better to see an author trying than one who isn't. At least he used his real name instead of creating ghost accounts.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Jan 3, 2014)

People are often hesitant to be the first one to do something.  Perhaps by seeing a review already there, they'll either not notice or ignore who wrote it, and be more liable to review it themselves.

Also, the guy just got free advertising because of the person who asked for a link.  I'd say, from a marketing perspective, it appears to have been a very smart move.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

Terry D said:


> I found the book on Amazon and quickly scanned the 'Look Inside' preview. It is written better than I expected (although he does seem to mix metaphors). The cover and layout are obviously amateur, but not distracting, and the story seems interesting.



Yes, it does sound interesting, I marked it as "to read" before I saw his review. I didn't say it's a bad book. It just surprised me.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

Gamer_2k4 said:


> People are often hesitant to be the first one to do something.  Perhaps by seeing a review already there, they'll either not notice or ignore who wrote it, and be more liable to review it themselves.
> 
> Also, the guy just got free advertising because of the person who asked for a link.  I'd say, from a marketing perspective, it appears to have been a very smart move.



I expect 25% of his royalties, after all, I "found" him, he he. But I'm glad if that'll help him to sell more books.


----------



## spartan928 (Jan 3, 2014)

Whisper said:


> This is unfair. Peoples tastes differ. So, if I don't like Dune and give it a 1 star and say it's a crap storty, you pass? Also, there are plenty of people that just like to be mean for no reason other than they like to be mean]
> 
> I'm not sure why I head right to the one stars. What I'm saying is I don't base what I read on Amazon reviews much at all and select primarily from my own author tastes regardless of reviews. But I do like to see the worst impressions first. It doesn't mean I pass, just that I find them entertaining, and sometimes more honest in ways positive reviews are not. Its all taken with heaps of salt and I appreciate that many people base their decisions on the frequency of positive reviews. With fiction, I don't seem to get a lot out of those 5 star glowing reviews because they always feel so biased positively toward the writer or the work. I gravitate to the bottom out of curiosity more than anything, but again, that's just a quirk of mine and I understand most people probably don't feel that way.


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 3, 2014)

It's part of the problem, when trying to rate a story by its reviews. There is a network of 'do each other a favour' reviews that default to a five, and it makes it hard to judge from the most positive. - I was faced with the dilemma of rating a story I'd read, and I chickened out. - It was below par, I thought, but the other reviews were sycophantically positive... Essentially, false positive reports are a way of extorting money out of an unsuspecting public. - I think I'd rather have zero sales, or just learn to write prose better than follow that route.


----------



## Robdemanc (Jan 3, 2014)

I have seen an author on Goodreads giving their own book 5 stars.  I doubt the author is in a good position to objectively review their own work.  But having said that, on Goodreads the star ratings relate to whether or not the reader liked it, so the author can read his/her own work and like it I suppose.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 3, 2014)

Robdemanc said:


> I have seen an author on Goodreads giving their own book 5 stars.  I doubt the author is in a good position to objectively review their own work.  But having said that, on Goodreads the star ratings relate to whether or not the reader liked it, so the author can read his/her own work and like it I suppose.



Like any writer would rate himself with two stars. If you don't like it, if you think it stinks, why did you publish it? Of course writer will like their work (but that doesn't mean you have to rate it).


----------



## Robdemanc (Jan 3, 2014)

I agree it is very arrogant.  It is like the trend of movie producers/writers/actors who go on TV to tell the audience how great their new film is.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Jan 3, 2014)

Robdemanc said:


> I agree it is very arrogant.  It is like the trend of movie producers/writers/actors who go on TV to tell the audience how great their new film is.



That's just promotion.  This is more like when Sony made fake fan videos to advertise the PSP, then had to own up to it when people found out.


----------



## gill woods (Feb 15, 2014)

im not sure i understand why an author would feel the need to rate their own work, other than them thinking it makes the book more appealing with 5stars. but i would not hold it against them and it wouldnt put me off reading it


----------



## Sam (Feb 15, 2014)

I would never review my own work. While I can be objective enough to do so with honesty, it's still unprofessional in my mind. I may think it is worth five stars (or less), but my opinion doesn't count in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## Bishop (Feb 16, 2014)

I think I'd rather at least know it's him than have horrendous sock puppet reviews. I released some music digitally a while back, and thought about giving myself a review, but when I really thought about it, I felt wrong about it. My work is its own review, my words standing for others to see and judge on their own. So obviously I didn't do it. But I wouldn't take it as a pull away from the work if I saw someone else do it. I'm not a fan of the practice, but it's really just a misguided mistake someone made about self-promotion. Just because they're terrible at marketing their own work doesn't necessarily mean their work is just as misguided.


----------



## thepancreas11 (Feb 16, 2014)

You must promote yourself as a writer or no one will ever read your work. That being said, there are ways of promoting yourself that generally uphold your dignity better than patting yourself on the back. I would spend less time writing a review for my own story and more time writing new pieces. A blog is a good way of getting yourself out there. Being on a forum is a good way of getting yourself out there. Writing your own review, that can be incredibly polarizing. If you need someone to get the ball rolling, force-feed your book to a friend and make them review it. Better yet, bring it to a place like this where we can do it too in a copyright safe environment.


----------

