Anne Rice and negative fans.

[dwg.livejournal.com]

Today, I woke up to Anne Rice talking about "negative fans" over multiple Facebook posts and LKH gets her own special mention.

From Anne Rice's fanpage:

Today I'd like to discuss an internet phenomenon that I've been observing for years: the Negative Fan. The Negative Fan is, for me, some one who develops a hobby or obsession with attacking a writer whom the Negative Fan believes to be bad, inadequate, a failure. For the Negative Fan this is a form of career. And it puzzles me. Why would anybody bother? [link]

Laurel K. Hamilton has also remarked on these "negative fans." I used to think they were an artifact of Amazon.com. But they are in a lot of places. They campaign against the author they claim to find worthless. One has to wonder what is the point? All authors must face criticism, and they must face indifference. But the negative fan? One has to wonder at the point of it all. [link]

I can understand sustained negative campaigns regarding political parties, politicians, religions, religious leaders, etc. After all these entities seek to influence our lives, our laws, our taxes, our social and political values. But a sustained negative campaign against a novelist you believe to be terrible? Again. What's the point exactly? [link]

If I don't like an author, I don't read that author. Yet these negative fans will write in so many words: "This author has gone from bad to worse over the years, and here again is another terrible book that fails on all levels." What does this mean exactly? That the person has spent hours reading an author he or she is condemning? To what end? [link]

The lesson for me is this: the internet has enabled some negative fans who wage destructive campaigns against writers they dislike for personal reasons. So when I read a review, I carefully evaluate it. I never take a response to a novel at face value. I look for a context that makes the review trustworthy as honest, and relevant. [link]

Why do I discuss the negative fan at all? Because I think it's a relatively new phenomenon and one that can confuse people. In the old days, these campaigns didn't exist. Yes, a newspaper book reviewer, angry at having received a new novel by an author she hates, might blast that writer, true. But usually it wasn't a full blown or sustained obsession. The internet enables obsessions. [link]

That last one is particularly hilarious when you know that Anne Rice took out a phone and print campaign to shut down a business she didn't like and writing angry letters to people, also telling IMDB that they're wrong on the internet (back when she was Christian). Look, just peruse the Anne Rice tag on F_W and you'll see that this chronicles over ten years worth of wanky behaviour. The lack of self-awareness is boggles my mind! But thank heavens for how the internet never forgets!

The part about "look for a context that makes the review trustworthy as honest, and relevant" is even funnier given this article that talks about 5-star reviews on the internet can easily be bought. And honestly, I find the negative reviews of products to be far more insightful than the positive ones.

I've been avoiding most of the Facebook comments, but it looks like nobody's struck on the idea of "we keep reading in the hopes that it will get better." or "trainwreck syndrome of awful book + wanky author behaviour = CRACK." I quit the Vampire Chronicles around Blackwood Farm because it was so terrible and used a gift voucher to get The Blood Canticle out of morbid curiosity to see how bad the book was that Rice famously had a total meltdown on Amazon at the bad reviews. I still haven't read the book, I've had better things to do with my time.

(Sidebar: Did you know Anne Rice is now writing about werewolves?)

Let us bask in this moment. And hope that LKH responds.

Comments

[killiara.livejournal.com]

You stuck around longer than I did. The Vampire Chronicles lost me when Lestat visted Heaven and Hell.

[dwg.livejournal.com]

I fell asleep (literally) reading that book and sorta skimmed the rest, then picked up the series again when she was writing about anyone that wasn't Lestat. I really loved the Armand book. Then I skipped...Merrick? That's when she started to crossover into the Mayfair Witches and the only book in that series I read was Lasher. Mostly I'm left going, "WHYYYY?" there's no reason to merge them together! ...god I have so many feelings on this. /o\

[evewithanapple.livejournal.com]

You lasted longer than I did. I bounced when he started sucking on tampons.

[fangedsekhmet.livejournal.com]

D: D: D:


I think I bailed before that. Glad that I did.

But oh, Anne Rice, so far up her own behind she can play Dixie on her nose hair.

It felt really good throwing her books out of the house.

[chubling.livejournal.com]

Wait...what? Yeah...I never got that far but...ew. Please tell me you are kidding.

[regoddy.livejournal.com]

Nope. Although I believe it was a pad.

Just went and checked, it was a pad. The passage starts on 393 in the paperback version of Memnoch if you're so inclined :) The majority of it focuses on drinking blood out of her vagina directly, although I am not sure if that makes it better or worse.

YOU'RE WELCOME

[regoddy.livejournal.com]

You're correct. This takes place at the end of the book between returning from Heaven/Hell and losing his mind before going into a coma.

[chubling.livejournal.com]

):

[rodentfanatic.livejournal.com]

HAHAHA that's terrific! I always wondered why vampires with human partners who wanted them to stop drinking blood from victims didn't just do THIS instead!

I love me some grossness in the vampire genre, since the fact they SUCK BODILY FLUIDS tends to get so romanticized and sexualized that it being shown in a way so nasty you can't get around it is actually something I'd have enjoyed reading about...even if I too would be squicking out the whole time XD

[regoddy.livejournal.com]

I think my favorite part is that he apologizes profusely pretty much the entire time he's doing it.

[rodentfanatic.livejournal.com]

Considering how I remember him from the first book (only one I read) that totally makes me smile. The suave sociopathic villain-as-main-character is definitely a sort that I enjoy seeing taken down a peg by the author in such a manner when it's been earned. Does this mean he doesn't become as much of an Author's Pet as I've been led to believe by the swooning of Internet fangirls? *hopeful*

[regoddy.livejournal.com]

Haha, oh no, he's TOTALLY an Author's Pet. Lestat really is just like an escapist, over the top character. If you're looking for like real people, relatable fiction Anne Rice is not your woman. I mean, he's a 80s hair metal rockstar vampire who literally can't die. He MEETS GOD IN PERSON.

[rodentfanatic.livejournal.com]

Oh wow if this was being written as something not to take seriously I'd probably really enjoy that, but from what I've heard that's sadly not the case...shit, man, I wish it was!

[rodentfanatic.livejournal.com]

Since there's a lot of discussion going on here about The Vampire Chronicles...are they worth a read, and do I have to read ALL of them/read them in order?

I read Interview and enjoyed it, but Claudia was my FAVE character. I didn't fall in love with Lestat, I saw him as a villain (albeit a good one) and didn't particularly see Louis as anything more than the vehicle for the story...so when I picked up the second book, I pretty much put it down after the first couple of pages because I hated Lestat's voice, didn't have much interest in a whole book about him, and there was no promise of Claudia returning. However, I've heard other people I know speak of really enjoying the series, and I get the feeling I would like this "Akasha" character I've heard about...so, basically, is it worth reading if I don't much care for frilly-shirted angsty gay vampire romance and tend to prefer gore, interesting lore, and the like?

[regoddy.livejournal.com]

Are you giving me a chance to discuss the pros and cons of the VC? Poor move! I mean despite my snark above thread I fucking LOVE the VC. They're what started me on vampire/"urban fantasy" to begin with. So you'll have to forgive the overly detailed rest of this post.

If you didn't like Lestat's voice you probably wouldn't like the books, although he changes dramatically between IWtV and The Vampire Lestat (so much so that there's a bit of hand waving retcon near the end of TVL). You may enjoy reading Queen of the Damned since that has different characters narrating different chapters (although Lestat is still the main character in some sense) and it discusses the lore of the universe the most. And, in fact, you may enjoy Memnoch. People bad mouth it a lot, but I personally liked Memnoch, although more as a stand alone book than as a part of the VC series. Memnoch and QotD are also the goriest in the series iirc.

I was going to recommend the Armand book until I read you don't like angsty gay vampire romance :P In that case, steer clear. The other books probably aren't worth a read unless you're invested in the characters like I was.

[rodentfanatic.livejournal.com]

Hey, snark can be a mark of love too! It means you enjoyed it enough to also think about its flaws ^^

I like that the books you've recommended are stand-alone, since I'm not in fact really into vampire genre books (Interview and the AB series are about the only ones I've read that were published after Dracula) I don't think I'd enjoy having to go through a whole series just for the parts I like. And, noooo, that is not my preference, I'm afraid, thank you for the heads-up!

Thanks also for the details, recommendations, and warnings, I'll remember them if I ever get a mind to go a-hunting for some Rice when the opportunity arises! I very much appreciate it!

[killiara.livejournal.com]

No, you don't have to read all of them in order, but... you absolutely will not understand Queen of the Damned without reading The Vampire Lestat first. It sets up alot of the action that follows, and what it dosen't set up is firmly in the 'Weird Shit' category.

I loved it as a teenage girl.
As an adult I refuse to read it again because I know it'll be nowhere near as awesome and I'll find a ton of things that make me go "YeeeeahNO."
I'd rather remember it fondly then confirm that going back would have me saying, "What the BLEEP was I thinking? Ew Ew EW."

[rodentfanatic.livejournal.com]

Ahaha, I have moments/fandoms like that too, I know what you mean XD

Thanks for the advice!

[ellenel13.livejournal.com]

If we don't read. how are we supposed to know it sucks?

Also, the last LKH books I read were Cerulean Sins and the one before A Lick of Frost (lol that title).

[jazzymegster.livejournal.com]

If we don't read. how are we supposed to know it sucks?

Exactly! Better than complaining about it being rubbish and having never even looked at it.

[lady-fellshot.livejournal.com]

Well, there's also being able to enjoy a book by mocking it incessantly rather than letting it alone. Alternate means of entertainment from the same text for the win!

[dwg.livejournal.com]

FOR REAL! I have a shameful amount of trashy books on my external drive that I have just for the crack. I mean, werepolarbears.

(OT: I love your icon)

[lady-fellshot.livejournal.com]

Were-polarbears? LOLOLOLOL

But still, I think it's kind of funny that some authors don't understand that sporking bad books can be fun in the same way that sporking terrible movies is fun.

Or they are okay with the concept, but don't understand that it could happen to them. Silly authors. :P

[nameless-cricke.livejournal.com]

because heaven forbid someone buy a book out of genuine interest, discover it's crap, and actually voice their displeasure, or actually have been a fan and now just want to voice how disappointed they are that a decent series is now crap due to this turn or that one. *rolls eyes* It does not surprise me that that woman has her head just as much up her own ass as LKH.

[dwg.livejournal.com]

I had a brief conversation on twitter about this and it was pointed out that many "negative fans" have explained themselves/their actions intelligently. Especially since the grimdark days of both Rice and Hamilton's meltdowns, because we now have social media that pretty much demolished the fourth wall.

What I hate is this attitude that people who disagree are automatically trolls and haters whenever (legit) criticism is brought up. :\

[kyoko-minamino.livejournal.com]

The reason I am a "negative" fan is not because I am petty and have nothing better to do, it's because I believe that LKH has done something fundamentally wrong and I don't know of anyone who has stood up to her before and so I decided to be that person. I don't do it because I just want something to rant about, I do it because I think she is a selfish, ignorant bitch who doesn't deserve to publish books and get millions of dollars while there are literally millions of struggling novelists who have better material and yet don't have publishing deals. That's why I made Snark Theater on Youtube and that's why I'm a "negative" fan. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Anne Rice. We have the right to criticize as long as that criticism is fair, balanced, and justified.

[gwynethfar.livejournal.com]

I love Anne Rice, but I don't think the "negative fans" she's referring to on her facebook page are the same that LKH complains about. While LKH "antifans" are displeased with the books, Anne's negative people attack her personally on her facebook about her political and religious views, and for the most part that seems to be what she's been talking about for the last few days. She's comparing two different situations without, I think, really understanding why people dislike LKH.

[mystickiwi.livejournal.com]

And there is a line that needs to be drawn with negative fans who are just miserable people who will make personal attacks on an author or hate something just because it's en vogue to hate on it (I see that a lot with Twilight, there are people who hate it for legitimate reasons, but also a lot of people who just want to seem cool by being negative). It's important for authors to learn to shut out those kinds of baseless attacks.

Of course it's equally important for authors to listen to criticism about the quality of their work by readers who aren't just complaining to complain... and we all know that Rice and LKH aren't so great at that

[suzycat.livejournal.com]

It was Lestat, particularly in looks. And of course Claudia was their first child who died.

[rodentfanatic.livejournal.com]

Wow, that really creeps me out D:

[queenmeow.livejournal.com]

If I don't like an author, I don't read that author. Yet these negative fans will write in so many words: "This author has gone from bad to worse over the years, and here again is another terrible book that fails on all levels." What does this mean exactly? That the person has spent hours reading an author he or she is condemning? To what end?

I find this comment a bit snobby, like only critics with degrees could be capable of recognizing crap writing.