Playing Nice or Keeping it Real?

Last week, Liz B. over at A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy responded to a not so nice Huffington Post article by Sara McCarry, called Faking Nice in the Blogosphere: Women and Book Reviews. McCarry makes a sweeping generalization of kids lit bloggers whom she observes lack literary rigour. Worse, she attributes her findings to the fact that these bloggers are typically women. Basically, it's a gushy girl thing.

Liz B.'s response sparked an interesting discussion in which I found myself at times in agreement with the article and also aghast at its generalizations. In other words, it created fabulous and fertile ground for a messy topic—right up my alley.

As a recovering legislative advocate*, I have no problem entering into debates like these where it's easy to offend. I think it's healthy to drag these things out from under the rug and expose the gritty underneath.

My first impression of the Huffington Post article was: oh yeah, kids lit reviews do tend to be lite, and there is an undercurrent of not wanting to get anyone's nose out of joint. This could be due to a number of factors. For one thing, bloggers come from diverse backgrounds and motivations, each with its own special hazard. I was recently told (cautioned) about one agent who said she'd never represent someone who wrote a bad review of a book she sold. I have no way of knowing if this is true, but it's enough for the idea to be floating around. Lucky for me, I don't care.

Another reason could have to do with having influence and access to publishers. Boy, wouldn't I love to be plied with a pile of ARCs. Fortunately, I  have to buy my own books (or borrow goopy ones from the library), so there's no risk that I'll lose any of those privileges. I don't know if influence plays a role, or how much, but we are human. It would be wrong not to question this. It's different for magazine or journal reviewers who owe their allegiance (and livelihood) to the signature on their paychecks.

I do think there's a gender bias in the blogosphere, but it tends to be passively against (not for) women; that is, men are more likely to be reviewed (I think Betsy Bird may have written about this) in comparison to the percentage of men who write for children. There are other, more subtle, indications of inequitable treatment (I hate to say it, but there really are some googly eyed bloggers who feel the likes of Mo Willems or Neil Gaiman can do no wrong. It's not the fact that they appreciate the works of rock stars, so much as the emotional delivery of their raves.)

But I don't think the lack of critical kid lit reviews has to do with gender so much as the fact that the children's book industry is phenomenally good-spirited and supportive. If niceness is a side effect of this, I'm not going to complain. I do, however, appreciate those who hold a writer's foot to the fire in a non-personal way. Trust me, writers know the flaws of their work. It feels like a little niggle deep inside that we hope is insecurity (at least I do), but is usually our digestive system's way of saying we've got problems with plot or character or whatever. When someone else notices it, ouch.

Nasty reviews are never called for. In fact, Tess Gallagher told me there's no point in reviewing poorly written books because they will sink without any assistance. Apparently, she's not read Twilight. Books by the yard aren't unique to kids lit, but we seldom see anyone take them on. Why? I dunno. I had problems with Catching Fire, the sequel to The Hunger Games, but everyone appears to love it. I had to step back and wonder what was wrong with my perception. Maybe it's an overlooked (or forgiven) sin of series to phone one in because everyone is so hooked on the characters that they crave draggy plots and the anticipation of the next book Or, maybe I was irritable and hungry (pardon the pun) when I read it.

Liz B. has proposed what I think is the best solution of blog reviews, which is to change the name to recommendations or discussions. She points out that blogging does not have the staff or editorial support of a magazine or journal. It's an unpaid labor of love done for free. I can live with that.

And finally (aren't you glad this is almost over?), I do think that writers (and bloggers) of kids lit need to be as gutsy as the characters they bring into the world. Girls especially need to sense that the person behind the words isn't afraid to take a few hits for speaking up. There are women writers who already do this, but we have to create an atmosphere that accepts and welcomes debate.

It's all good.


*A legislative advocate is technically a registered lobbyist who works in the field in which she/he advocates as opposed to being a hired gun with lots of clients--it also means we can be identified by our propensity for crying. In my case, I advocated and bawled over issues related to children and adults with developmental disabilities (and still do, but at a safer distance).