CCBC-Net Archives
pros and cons
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Susan Katz <katz>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 20:13:58 -0400 (EDT)
Isn't there a real distinction between the terms "mean-spirited" and
"discussion"? Or shouldn't there be? I think I probably speak for most writers in saying that constructive criticism of a book is welcome; it can make the next book better. But, to respond to Susan's child analogy
(which I fear is probably an accurate one), isn't there a big difference between saying, "I'm having a problem with Johnny" and saying, "This is the most obnoxious little brat I ever saw"? Shouldn't it be possible to present the cons of a book and still couch them in friendly terms? If not, what circumstances do you think justify or require a harsh tone on the reviewer's part?
Susan Katz, writer katz at netaxs.com
On Sat, 26 Sep 1998, Susan Daugherty wrote:
Received on Sat 26 Sep 1998 07:13:58 PM CDT
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 20:13:58 -0400 (EDT)
Isn't there a real distinction between the terms "mean-spirited" and
"discussion"? Or shouldn't there be? I think I probably speak for most writers in saying that constructive criticism of a book is welcome; it can make the next book better. But, to respond to Susan's child analogy
(which I fear is probably an accurate one), isn't there a big difference between saying, "I'm having a problem with Johnny" and saying, "This is the most obnoxious little brat I ever saw"? Shouldn't it be possible to present the cons of a book and still couch them in friendly terms? If not, what circumstances do you think justify or require a harsh tone on the reviewer's part?
Susan Katz, writer katz at netaxs.com
On Sat, 26 Sep 1998, Susan Daugherty wrote:
Received on Sat 26 Sep 1998 07:13:58 PM CDT
