Writer William Maltese is a veteran writer of over 100 novels, with an eclectic mix of offerings spaning almost three decades of work.
Visit his website for more information about his work.
author William Maltese questions Transgender Forum book reviewer Adrian deBolt
Preface:My Green Candy Press book, THAI DIED, just got reviewed in the May 2003 Brit gay magazine reFRESH (“The intelligent read for gay men”). I think I know just the process by which the review got there.
I’ve always had my theories as to most of the “hows” of getting a book reviewed, but I decided to test those theories by going to a source, hearing it from one horse’s mouth, getting the poop and/or scoop, asking someone who reviews books on a regular basis.
Interview:
William Maltese: Adrian, is there any big difference, do you suppose, between the process you use to select a Transgender-theme book for review on tgforum.com and the one, say, a reviewer of gardening books would use?
Adrian deBolt: You’d have to ask a reviewer of gardening books. But, I’d be surprised to hear there was much, if any difference. Whatever the type of book being reviewed, it arrives at the reviewer’s desk from the same sources: the publisher … the author … a friend of the reviewer … the bookstore…
WM: Bookstores give reviewers comp copies?
AdB: You might be surprised to hear how many of the books I review are bought by me, at the bookstore, with my own money. If just because it relieves me of any obligation that might be assumed, covertly or overtly, by my having accepted a book gratis. Too many people, and I mean even those publicity people who should know better, from some big-name publishers, can get indignant at a bad review if they’ve given me the book in question.
WM: So, you put out your own good money — and thank-you very much! — for both my A SLIP TO DIE FOR and THAI DIED when you reviewed them, as well as for my SS MANN HUNT [which Adrian was kind enough to mention, in passing, although in the book there’s not a Tg character in sight]?
AdB: In fact, I did buy your A SLIP TO DIE FOR and your SS MANN HUNT. Though because I liked A SLIP TO DIE FOR so much, I found it easy to accept the comp copy of the second book of your Stud Draqual Mystery Series, when the freebie of THAI DIED was offered me by your publisher.
WM: So, if I have this book just out, what I do, then, is call you up and say: “Yo, Adrian! I’ve this absolutely great novel about a drag gardener, so you best get your ass on down to the bookstore, put down your own hard-earned cash, and read the book for review”?
AdB: Please, don’t call! I don’t care what time anyone decides to do it, it’s always that exact moment that I have to take a pee. As for the rest of it, you might have better success with a more diplomatic e-mail. Something like: “Adrian, really enjoy your reviews. Think I may have a book you’ll enjoy and hopefully review. It’s about a Tg gardener, and I don’t think you’ve reviewed a book on that subject lately. Can I send you a comp copy?” That brings the book to my attention. That gives me the pleasant option of writing back: “Do go ahead and send the book, although realize that I receive a good many books, and I can only review one of them a month. What’s more, I can’t guarantee a good review unless I really like the book, and there’s always the chance I won’t enjoy yours.” Or, more likely, I’ll think, “Right, I haven’t reviewed any books on drag gardeners lately.” And, I’ll buy the book myself.
WM: About this, “Adrian, really enjoy your reviews”? Is my theory correct that a bit of suck-up never hurts in getting a book reviewed?
AdB: There’s suck up and then there’s suck up. To be truly successful at it, you’ve got to use a bit of finesse. I mean, a reviewer is going to appreciate someone who professes to enjoy his or her reviews but will be put off by the obvious insincerity of sucking sounds heard ‘round the world.
WM: All of those sources of books for a reviewer that you mentioned, other than buying the books yourself — Do you, as a reviewer, give precedence to any one over the others? I sometimes feel review copies of my books, whether sent out by my publisher, or by me, simply disappear down some rat hole.
AdB: No rat holes at my place. But, look — Popular gay magazines like “The Advocate” see incoming every gay book, on every gay subject, fiction or nonfiction, that ever there is, and are bound to see some of those freebies inadvertently slip through the cracks. It just happens.
WM: So, my publisher sends a copy of my book to “The Advocate” for review — Should I personally check to see if it’s lost in the shuffle?
AdB: Checking in with a magazine, via e-mail, to see if your book arrives, after a reasonable time lapse, is always a smart thing for an author to do, if the publicity department of your publisher doesn’t do it for you. Better to offer the magazine a second review copy, though, if the first gets lost, than to throw a “You’re bloody incompetents!” wing-ding. Believe it or not, even at “The Advocate”, it’s unlikely review copies of books get purposely tossed into the circular file without due consideration. Reviewers, like I, whose field of expertise is more subject-specific, seldom lose a book. On tgforum.com, I have the option of reviewing a book, no matter how long its been on the stands, so I keep handy each and every pertinent book that comes my way, even the ones I don’t immediately review, for potential review later.
WM: What’s this “reasonable time-lapse” before check-in to which you’ve referred?
AdB: Just use a little common sense. Certainly if your book comes out in June and suddenly the site or the print magazine in question is reviewing books that came out after yours, you’d best check in.
WM: I know for a fact you review POD books, but not every reviewer does that, does he?
AdB: Most publishers of books, and of the print media in which reviews of those books appear, like reviews to coincide with a book’s official release date. Which, taking into account the long lead-in of most print magazines, means they have to have a review copy of your book two or three months before the magazine and your book officially hit the stands. Regular publishers are able to oblige, sometimes just sending the magazine a copy of the book galleys, but with POD publishers that just doesn’t happen.
WM: Other than that drawback for PODs, do you think there’s a prejudice against them in the reviewer “community”.
AdB: Sure there’s a prejudice, depending upon the segment of the reviewer community to which you refer. I often turn to POD books because Tg authors haven’t had that much access to regular publishers or to the official gay press. By way of other subject matter, say gay mysteries, a reviewer may have a wide enough selection from which to choose without making an effort to sort through PODs which still have a bad rep as books about most anything, written by just about anyone with the money to pay for publication. PODs, frankly, are still known for bad writing, bad grammar, and tons of typos. Some reviewers simply don’t have the time, what with deadlines and all, to wade through the POD bad stuff to get to the real gems. A book from a regular publisher can be expected to have had several go-throughs by proofreaders and editors. Even then, many of their books even slip through flawed, and that only make reviewers more suspect of the less-vetted PODs.
WM: And does Jennifer Finney Boylan’s SHE’S NOT THERE: A LIFE IN TWO GENDERS, due out in July from The Doubleday Broadway Publishing Group [A Division of Random House, Inc.] have a better chance of getting reviewed in your column, come July, than does, say, some POD book?
AdB: In truth, yes. I’ve already received my polite would-you-like-an-advanced copy query and, shortly thereafter, received the book itself.
WM: Not one that you trotted down to the bookstore to buy, then?
AdB: This book has such a publicity push going behind it, including how the book’s “Afterward” was written by the author’s good buddy, Pulitzer Prize winner Richard Russo, and there are so many freebie review copies floating around, even in the mainstream press, it would have been ridiculous for me to pass. Especially since, even if I hate the book, and say so in my review, I’m not likely to get complaints from Random House that’s been around long enough to know that any such so-highly ballyhooed book isn’t going to bat one-hundred. And while on the subject of bad reviews, can I add a little something here, by way of consolation, just in case I don’t like the next book of yours that comes across my desk?
WM: Oh-oh!
AdB: Authors shouldn’t get so upset by bad reviews. A review, after all, is only the opinion of one person who may have just been having a bad day. The more important thing is that even bad review gets the author’s name, as well as the name of his book, “out there”. And, often, it’s just the author’s name and/or the book title that’s ever remembered when the book is spotted on-line or in the stores by a potential buyer. I actually have readers who are so frequently in disagreement with my opinions that they only read my reviews so they can avoid whatever I recommend and buy whatever I pan. Go figure!
WM: Thank you, Adrian deBolt, for this interview, for all of your rave reviews of my books in the past, for every one of your bad reviews of my books that may be forthcoming.
AdB: And that, William, is exactly what I mean whenever I talk about genuinely productive, diplomatic, delivered-with-finesse, kiss-ass.
[Have a Tg-theme book, or a book with a Tg even as just a minor character, that you’d like to see reviewed on tgforum.com? Adrian can be contacted, via e-mail (no phone calls, please!) at adriand@tgforum.com].
END
Home • Issue 8 Front Page • Newsletter Archives • Article Archives