Harriet Has Spoken
As virtually all of you know, Harriet Klausner is a book reviewer. She reviews hundreds of books a year. She likes everything she reviews, and she loves many of those books. Over the years, two things have happened with Harriet reviews: they've become more and more incoherent (presumably as she's typing too fast to correct herself, given the thousands of pages she must read each day), and they've been posted in more and more places. Any one Harriet review is likely to appear in at least two dozen book review forums on the Web.
(Many authors despise Harriet for her less-than-thoughtful reviews. Many people have wondered if Harriet actually has read all the books she says she has read. Many people accuse Harriet of reading the back cover copy of books and basing her review on that information.)
Well, Harriet has reviewed SORCERY AND THE SINGLE GIRL. She doesn't spoil the plot *too* much (although she does, a bit.) She gets several details wrong. She misconstrues, in a fairly substantial way, the title of the first book in the series. But she doesn't work too much damage, given the fact that this review is the one that is going to proliferate across the web for the next several months...
One incarnation: http://www.alternative-worlds.com/2007/0
Have you come across Harriet before? Do you agree with her reviews? Disagree? Think that her technique is good, bad, or ugly?
Mindy, shrugging
(Many authors despise Harriet for her less-than-thoughtful reviews. Many people have wondered if Harriet actually has read all the books she says she has read. Many people accuse Harriet of reading the back cover copy of books and basing her review on that information.)
Well, Harriet has reviewed SORCERY AND THE SINGLE GIRL. She doesn't spoil the plot *too* much (although she does, a bit.) She gets several details wrong. She misconstrues, in a fairly substantial way, the title of the first book in the series. But she doesn't work too much damage, given the fact that this review is the one that is going to proliferate across the web for the next several months...
One incarnation: http://www.alternative-worlds.com/2007/0
Have you come across Harriet before? Do you agree with her reviews? Disagree? Think that her technique is good, bad, or ugly?
Mindy, shrugging
I'm probably in the minority, though.
But I've also not heard of her.
Although I've never met her, I have heard her interviewed and she does appear to be earnest and apparently does read all those books she comments on. However, I expect it is Evelyn Wood style reading which is more akin to skimming.
I imagine she'll probably get 'hold of my book eventually. I'm not too worried about it, because there's not a lot I could do anyway. *smile* I wonder how many people actually trust her reviews anymore.
That said, I don't know many readers who take reviews seriously - I'm more inclined to see them as being for the reviewer and aimed at the writer. So it boils down to what you think about it. If you don't rate her as a reviewer, then whilst it's good to have a positive review floating in cyberspace, I'd forget about her.
I think she is a speed reader, and because of this I think she sometimes misses huge plot points and details. So.. I think she means well, but her reviews are a little off and reading that many books - is it healthy I wonder? Anyway, so far I haven't found her to be as annoying as some people do, but I am just a reader. If I was a writer and I wrote something and saw her review it incorrectly (and often she's the first/only reviewer for certain books) I'd be a little alarmed. As a reader - she fascinates me... is it some kind of OCD?
Harriet
She misses major plot points, ignores themes altogether, and doesn't seem to put any thought into the reviews. Her - blurbs - don't function as "reviews", as such.
It's nice that somebody's paying attention, but if she wants to "review" she has some work to do.
They did a report on Harriet for the Sunday Morning show, I think; one of those, about six months ago. The basic feeling was pretty much what you see here :)
I don't know anyone who takes them seriously. Are they really used as cover blurbs? That strikes me as being like those movies where you see on the poster "THE BEST ACTION MOVIE OF THE YEAR!" and then in teeny-tiny print you see that this quote comes from the DJ at WBSS Radio in Oconomowoc, WI.
I don't really place much weight on her comments on a story, for many of the reasons mentioned, and these days I won't actually read one of her reviews unless it's the only one out there for the book that I'm interested in.
I will, however, note that just because someone almost always writes positive comments about a book doesn't necessarily mean that she's not actually reading the whole book. I find that I have mostly positive thoughts about most of the books I read and post about in my book journal, largely because I only buy books I think I will enjoy or at least find interesting, and I've become a pretty good judge of what I'm going to like over the years.
Having just finished James Surowiecki's THE WISDOM OF CROWDS (thesis being a diverse & independent crowd in the long run will always be smarter than an expert)shows how a collection of comments (such as these) & reviews will quickly demonstrate where the truth lies.
On the other hand, some writers look forward to getting Klausnered sheerly for the amusement.