Sunday, May 20, 2007

Happy Birthday Harriet !

I was wrong about Harriet Klausner reaching her 14,000 review milestone on this auspicious date. According to the information that she gave to her interviewers HK would be fifty six years old today. My birthday wish for Harriet is that this year she will begin a healthier lifestyle. Perhaps getting out of the house more frequently, taking a walk, planting a garden, doing something more pleasurable than compulsively reviewing books she clearly has not read.


Barbara Delaney said...

S.A.M. had a fantastic comment today on HK's review of Tempting the Prince. I would urge you all to read it. Nice work!

And while on the subject of great comments, MK's brilliant rebuttals of the long-winded LE Cantrell were remarkable. I fully expect LE Cantrell to publish a book "The Klausner Defense". I predict Harriet will give it five stars.

Moderator said...

Where is that, Barbara? A link?

KG said...

Here is what S.A.M. had to say in defense. All I have to say is OUCH especially from an author such as Grasso. I can't believe she would post and make fun of another reviews the way she did!
Oh by the way, I have tried to read this author's books and let me tell you, she still needs work after 15 novels! She is one author that I no longer would want to read after her snarky remarks.

Patricia Grasso,

HK is a "speed reader." She "speed reads" numerous books in one day. Although as of late she has slowed down significantly. I am assuming because of all of us who took notice are questioning her abilities. To give you some examples, on March 8th she posted 43, on March 10th she posted 32, March 11th she posted 44,and skipping days to April 5th she posted 67. She does not read the entire book and then write a review with her opinions on it. She skims the back cover and then summerizes it. She gives EVERY review 4 or 5 stars.

>> "Mike" is obviously a typo << HK has typos in many of her reviews. She sometimes gets the name of the author or main character wrong. She sometimes even writes the review to the wrong book.

A few authors themselves have expressed their disappointment in an HK review. Harriet does not give you the time your book deserves. Her "reviews" do not give the potential buyer a review they deserve.

>> I cannot understand the reason someone would comment on a review of a book when that person has not actually read the book being reviewed. In my opinion, taking such an action constitutes abuse of amazon who ,in good faith, wants to foster discussion of books, not give persons an avenue in which to harass others. <<

I am curious about something. You are concerned about why someone would bother to comment on a book they have not read. I am assuming you would feel it is okay for a person who HAS read the book to leave a REVIEW. A review being someone's evaluation of the book read. How THEY felt about it. So why did you "harass" the reviewer with the "cute little pen name", SusieQ?? Here is your review of Mistress At A Price (Harlequin Presents)
by Sara Craven:

>> I am the author of 15 romance novels. This particular book is on my Keeper shelf. Take MY advice, and I promise you will love it. The previous reviewer, SusieQ.... my, my, my what a cute little pen name.... SusieQ hates all the books she reviews. If you don't believe me, read her reviews. She is a woman who likes to see herself in print but doesn't have the guts to write her own book. But then, it is sooo much easier to criticize others than to take a risk yourself. <<

And it wasn't just this review. Here is another.
The Greek Tycoon's Convenient Mistress (Harlequin Presents)
by Lynne Graham:

>> I am a published historical romance author of 15 books. I loved the hero/heroine and have read the book several times. Yes, the hero was a little over the top alpha and the heroine slowly but surely defended herself. Big deal, people! This is a fairy tale... Perhaps some of you need to get a REAL life instead of getting off on seeing your criticisms in print. <<

SusieQ, Adromeda, Mary L. Hammes, thank your for YOUR HONEST opinions.

Moderator said...

I didn't see any of this, where's this coming from?

Barbara Delaney said...

Moderator said...

I got it. SAM did a great job, thumbs up! Now about these authors like Pat: they don't even understand the harm they cause to themselves by acting this way. On the other hand, considering the genre, perhaps this is what one should expect after all.

Stephanie said...

I am curious if Pat will reply back. I am actually expecting her to. She has a HUGE ego.

Misfit said...

I can't believe an author would be so crass as to make a snotty comment about a poor review. If I was a potential reader of her book and saw that, I would take my business elsewhere.

KG said...

Pat should not have a huge ego, her book are so BLAH!!
Sorry if anyone is a fan of her books, I can't stand them.

appifany said...

I had wrote a review on Tempting the Prince. (Thanks for defending my review Barbara.) I was surprised that the author was so venemous and wanted more details. I thought the whole point of the review was not to give any spoilers away?

I was most annoyed and decided to give a few more details so that Patricia would believe I read her book, so anyone planning on reading that book, don't go farther in my comments.

I wasn't trying to be mean to the author, and it wasn't like I hated the book. However, needless to say, I will never read another book by that author again.

appifany said...

and a couple more things...

Does a review have to be 3+ paragraphs for it to be considered an actual review?

Does it have to go deeply into all the detail in order for readers and/or authors to be satisfied?

Do I have to give all books five stars in order to be considered a reviewer?

We should poll Amazon readers. :) There, now I feel better.

Barbara Delaney said...

Appifany, as soon as I saw your name I knew this woman needed a talking to. I found your review to be honest and not at all a potential turn-off to anyone considering reading this particular book. I could not believe the author would actually take a reader to task over what was clearly a genuine review.

Her comments to other reviewers, including the one making fun of someone's name, were surprising coming from an author who wanted to sell her own books. Didn't she realize she had just insured that none of these people would ever purchase a Patricia Grasso novel?

Misfit said...


As far as I'm concerned a review should be less about the plot (that's easy enough to figure out from the publisher descriptions) and more about how you felt after finishing it. I only go looking for those types of reviews when I'm really into a book and I am looking for a spoiler or two.

Did I enjoy the author's prose? Was it a sit on the edge of your seat can't put it down kind of a book? Did it sweep you away into another century? Did it suck (state that tacfully of course)? Was the violence over the top for your taste?

Those are the reviews that I appreciate from other reviewers and I've rarely seen them in the top 500's on Amazon. Not everyone reads the same types of books, so tastes will vary and so reviews will vary as well. I remember seeing a review for Jane Eyre and some little miss who wasn't too happy with her school assignment stated the book was only good to be used as toilet paper. She got a few negs on that one, but it was her opinion.

KG said...

When I write my reviews, I put the basic plot points and the overall good and bad. I try not to give away major things.
Because the majority of my reviews are romance, I try to expand on different things that would catch a romance reader's eye such as a fault of the main character such as being blind, have a scar, etc... and the overall sensuality of the book.
On the other hand I would never give away an ending such as a chracter dying and so forth. I feel the review should be a teaser.
I get so upset when in movie reviews they give away a major plot point. Some ass did that for 28 Weeks Later. In a professional review they gave away a major plot point. GRRRR!!!!
And if the reviews are paragraoh after paragraph of BS my eyes glaze over....

Barbara Delaney said...

It seems that Patricia Grasso took some of the comments to heart and changed her tone. Perhaps she realized that it's in her own best interest to be more amenable to honest criticism.

On the subject of changing tone, I see there is now a kindler,gentler MM. Don't be fooled. This individual will do whatever it takes to keep the focus off of Harriet Klausner's reviews. He/she would prefer to discuss politics or his or her delight with the comments of FTF or assure Lonnie that he/she gives him positive votes "whenever I have the time". I know some people believe MM is either Klausner herself or perhaps a close friend or relative. Others believe MM to be just your generic troll, I have my own suspicions as to the identity of this troll. But despit the actual identity its purpose is clear, to change the subject. Don't let it do that.

Stephanie said...

I agree that Pat's comments were toned down. She didn't answer right away. She probably had to sit down and think about what she was saying and make sure it was not offending. Appifany got an apology and a thank you under her comment. I thought it was interesting that she did not make one comment about her using Amazon "as an avenue to harass others." Maybe she really didn't realize what she was doing?? I've done that before. Written something using a certain "tone" then rereading it and realizing it didn't sound the way I intended for it to sound.