Blog flog : 18 February

[dwg.livejournal.com]

link: http://www.eridine.com/blog/2005_02_01_archive.html#110873765909079698
title: "Thanks"
date: 18 February 2005

Because it's short, the entire entry is here:

Thanks

This is a thank you to everyone who sent in positive messages last weekend. So many positive messages that the e-mail crashed three times. This is not a complaint, guys. Darla explained to me that the crash happened because of the overwhelming number of positive messages. That apparently, everyone in the silent majority got together all at once and decided to let us know how much they love the books and how shocked they were at how rude some people have been. One message we got several times was, if I had been that rude to anyone, they'd be screaming about it, and rightly so. But they feel justified in being that rude to me, to us. I can't explain it guys. If I could I would. It is a puzzlement.

For the love of any deity or demon you care to mention, for the love of small, furry animals...I just want to scream "NOOO!!!"

Firstly, if the people expressing positive messages are outnumbered by the vocally negative - that puts them in the minority. Saying that a silent majority has finally become vocal is a contradiction of terms - alas, I don't expect her to understand that concept, but I don't have a sledgehammer and unfettered access to her person. I don't know about everyone else, but if you say something is silent, then it makes no noise. It does not communicate via the usual channels. To otherwise express and notify Ms Hamilton of their undying love would break said silence.

Secondly - what the hell is this silent majority crap anyway? If you're going to look at it from a rating standpoint and say every message received represents say, four people - then the people who send positive messages are still outnumbered by the nay-sayers. To say that for every person that sends an email/guestbook message, another 10 people remain in silent praise for the woman is ridiculous. Not every person on the planet has heard of Laurell K. Hamilton and her apparent undying glory.

I don't think it's actually occured to the woman that maybe, just maybe, the people saying Bad Things may have justification and a point? That it might be worth listening to some of the rants and rails just to get some insight into what her demographic thinks? I mean, we're the ones that pay her freaking salary. The people that buy/read the books are the ones that give her a reason to live in her own little dreamworld. The fact that so many people may want her to just curl up and die should not be ignored.

This brings me to third - um, Laurell, honey? If you can't figure out why people are so pissed off even when they write it in bold caps, you need to have a Chainsaw of Natural Selection aenema. Because...having messages that read "too much sex, where's the plot?" and all those scathing reviews on Amazon, Bookslut and with the fans of the globe, they're too difficult to decipher.

Lastly - so being rude doesn't work? Being blunt and direct to a woman that has confessed to being "contrary" isn't the way to get through to her? Manners won't work because that takes even more effort to figure out than "GIVE US SOME ---ING PLOT!!!" Short of that Chainsaw of Natural Selection - what the hell is it going to take to make her see that we, the core fans, are pissed off?

*headdesk*

Someone has to bring her back to this plane I like to call "reality." Maybe we should take out a hit on Jon. Nobody'd miss Jon. It'd show her that we're resolved in getting decent novel. Anyone know any serious, die-hard, Edward wannabes?

Comments

[dwg.livejournal.com]

What I find amusing is that one of my online friends, while not fond of the way the books have turned, can actually come up with defences for the way it's gone and spots various foreshadowing things. He's quite quick to point out that "No, Incubus Dreams actually wasn't about strippers being murdered - it's a set up for a showdown between the Church of Eternal life and the other vampires, as well as the countdown to the final showdown between St. Louis and the council."

Which makes an awful lot of sense once someone points it out. However, it doesn't change the fact that we've had about four or five books of foreshadowing and no shadowing. The bad guys turn up via remote - what? They don't have a frequent flyer scheme? They're building an arc? I want them to get to St. Louis and layeth the smacketh down.

...there's a reason why I play bad guys in nearly all my AB rpgs.

[nanale.livejournal.com]

But even if it's a bridge to the next book, there's no rule, that it has to come along with a decay of writing style and plot. Not to mention, that a foreshadowing, that is hidden so much, half of the readers don't ever notice it, is not a sign of quality or can keep a series stirring for 4-5 books.
My problem with LKH's blog is, that she uses the cliche of the "silent majority" and she uses it not even in a creative way. Listening to her, I get the feeling, she tries to deny or lock out the stronger criticism but knows deep down, that she'll lose this. Her text sounds assuring, that she made nothing wrong and only the big bad world treats her so unfair.

[dwg.livejournal.com]

Her text sounds assuring, that she made nothing wrong and only the big bad world treats her so unfair.

That's one of the main things that annoys me about her blog. It's like she - and in reflection both Anita and Merry - just can't take responsibility for herself and so it's "not her fault,"

I really hope that something happens to give her a wake up call.