I felt the same way – the reviewer was complimentary except for the errors. The objections came out of nowhere, from what I saw.

JMS, I agree. Some writers aren't superb spellers. They can weave a story, but can't get it grammatically correct. That's fine. It's why editors exist. I work with a client frequently who understands he/she has limitations and pays me to manage that limitation. Nothing wrong with that. (I liked the macaroni comment, too!)

I once had an editor transpose the dates of an historical event that I had correct in my galleys (and had the proof), but the company refused to change it or put in an errata slip. I was mortified. But, you know what? Other than some snarky or puzzled comments, which I dealt with, and feeling like crap for a few weeks, the world did not end.

Reviews are part of the gig. I don't love everything I'm sent for review (although I try to be as fair and positive as possible, while still being honest), and not everyone's going to love what I write. Part of the deal. You have to learn how to cope. It's part of the business.

I had a publisher go apes*$t on me when I pointed out that he released a $50 book with 15 typos in the first 45 pages. Not the ARC, but the finished book. That should have been caught, especially at that price. And some of the typos completely changed the meaning (it was a biography of someone whose work I was very familiar with, which is why I'd been assigned the book). When you use "warn" instead of "warm" — that changes the context pretty significantly.

This is such an example of a flame war… the reviewer would have been better off responding only once or twice and then letting it go… no one is served by this.

Sorry Lori, but I hate it when I have to watch people go nuts… she needs help.

sigh

The only rational excuse for her behavior that I can come up with is that perhaps she had a nervous breakdown upon reading what was actually a fairly complimentary review of the story itself.

Thanks a lot Jenn, now I have to go read her bio. There goes the rest of my lunch break!

Cathy, I wish more people were aware of their limitations! Not everyone is a natural writer, and that's fine. There must be something this woman is good at, but it is not writing.

Some of the comments are priceless. I particularly like "You act like a child when told your macaroni painting isn't worthy to sit in the Louvre."

Good thing I recognize my limitations. Too bad the same couldn't be said about the author IMHO. (see-I know acronyms, too). 🙂

Jenn is right that her writing is atrocious, in light of which I'd say the review is kinder than it should have been. And you must, must, must read the bio. This was my fave: "She wrote articles and sent them out to the masses, with the money from her own pocket, during the ignorant times of denial, when sexual promiscuity was rampant, and gays were just coming out of the closet." I wonder if it was Euripides or "Edga" Allan Poe who influenced her in that epic prosaic gem…

Cathy, ARC=Advanced Reading Copy 🙂

And this is a good lesson in stereotyping – I was sure she was a Youngen. Shame on me. 🙂