A lot of would-be writers - and published writers as well - are mortified when they get a bad review on Amazon. I know I used to be. But the thing is, bad reviews fall into two distinct categories. Those which give you constructive feedback and those which are just totally unconstructive. Take my last review for "die Stunde X". Apparently, the reader found it to be "outstandingly bad" (I feel the same way about most books by Martina Cole and Andy McNab, though I still read their stuff). He goes on to state that the book is banal and the characters are two-dimensional. In fairness, I wrote the book twenty odd years ago, and my characterizations weren't that strong back then (I was still learning to write - give a guy a break, and all that). Now, it could be said that I take the guy's criticism on board - though I do tend to disagree that the book is "banal" or "outstandingly bad" (such negative superlatives have no place in reviews written by nobodies). The book sales alone for its sequel would tend to disprove that (if you think the first book is shit, you certainly won't buy its follow-up). But delving deeper into the review, which only took a few seconds, I found that guy had reviewed only two other books and had described both of them as being pretty rubbish as well - he's a regular Mr-One-Star reviewer. It's one thing to write reviews, but surely this guy must have read at least one book that he actually likes? And there's the thing. People usually only write a review if they absolutely loved a book or absolutely hated it. The fact that this guy can only criticize negatively speaks volumes. At first, I was upset - for about 60 seconds - but the review came on royalties day, so I just cracked open a bottle of champagne and forgot about it.
What I'm saying is this. If you're a new writer, you're going to feel really depressed if you get a bad review. Don't be. Take on board any of the criticism you manage to find within the review, consider whether the reviewer has a point, and perhaps learn a lesson from it. Then consider the fact that reviewer is probably just a bog-standard reader who has never written a book (readers are fantastic people, but they're not writers), and your book probably just doesn't appeal to him or her, and it's really nothing personal. And if you're a prolific writer, a) you will learn more about writing with each book, each short story, that you write, b) you will start to make a few book sales and earn a bit of cash and c) you will get to the point where you just don't give a fuck about banal reviews by people with nothing better to do with their lives than rubbish the hard work of others. Remember - there are no monuments to critics ...
