I’ve read a
very interesting post, written by Carolyn Jewel on her blog. It was entitled A Modest Proposal and its author suggested how to deal with those ugly,
pesky, negatively inclined and satirical book reviewers at the Goodreads site.
If you want to have a laugh go there and read it; in a nutshell Carolyn
proposed the creation of the Book Review Security Department, backed by Navy
SEAL guys and such. Nice, isn’t it? If you wrote a bad, nasty, cynical,
scathingly witty review with some inappropriately funny giff images to
illustrate your point, you could be practically sure of a visit of Navy elite
soldiers in very tight-fitting, black swimming suits, appropriately armed and
muscled. Looking devastatingly handsome. Right now I almost imagine an ARMY of female
reviewers (and also some male ones) planning the nastiest reviews possible
while drooling madly – such a visit is better (and certainly cheaper)
than the Chippendales, right? And with all advantages of free home delivery!
Still…shouldn’t
there be also an appropriate regulation concerning bad authors? After
all every avid reader has stumbled upon a book he or she definitely wouldn’t
have wanted to read at all. A book which shouldn’t have existed, written by an author who should have remained illiterate in the interest of the
population at large. A book which leaves a horrible aftertaste, which can be
compared to something nasty and smelly, something slimy, fungus-covered and
rotten…well, you get the idea. What should be done with such authors? Because I
am pretty sure every reader and reviewer agrees something must be done. Think
system. Think law and order. Think economy, stupid!
First of
all a bill or an act should be passed and it must be done worldwide. It will be stated
clearly and loudly that bad literature = primo: more misspent money for useless
libraries' shelves, full of books nobody will bother to read after a while; secundo: bad future for our
children due to unnecessary deforestation and/or constantly blocked servers;
tertio: a headache for us right NOW. Start gathering all these necessary
signatures, consult your MP or your Representative, explain to all and sundry
that a bad book is like a fart – it makes both the fartor and the fartee very
inconvenient although for different reasons (of course you can use different
words depending on your target audience).
Here are my proposals.
For minor
offences (from a short story to an average novelette, approx. from 100 to 17,500
words) first I suggest sending a cease-and-desist letter and, if the demand is not
obeyed (I bet it will not be obeyed in 90% of the cases) then the offender should be
forced to do a spell of community service and pay a fine. The social service might
include but should not be limited to: public toilet cleaning, street sweeping, car
cleaning, serving free coffee in public areas (at the cost of the perpetrator of course),
bathing and combing stray dogs and cats etc. The social service should be
chosen in such a way to prevent a bad author from writing and/or speaking and
teach him/her the value of proper words said/written in proper time. The fine should reflect the
range of the offence properly – every word = one dollar. The significant funds,
gathered that way, might be used to create jobs in libraries around the world
and enlarge awareness what a good book is. I am sure this way the unemployment among specialists in the arts will be reduced fast to a laughably low level.
If the
offender remains unrepentant he or she might be forced to translate texts from Difficultese into English. I have even one example in mind – it is just
one sentence which won the Bad
Writing Contest (1997 edition); it was written by Judith Butler, a Guggenheim Fellowship-winning professor of rhetoric and
comparative literature at the University of California at Berkeley.
The
move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure
social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which
power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation
brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked
a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as
theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent
possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound
up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power.
After
translating such a beauty every wannabe writer will think twice before taking a
biro or switching on their text editor. Or at least I hope so. They might even enlarge their vocabulary. :)
For real
crimes against literature (from a novella to a novel starting a series, approx.
from 17,500 to over 40,000 words) the punishment should be definitely harsher.
After all you can hardly write a novel overnight – planning it beforehand
suggest a lot of premeditation and especially willful perseverance from the
side of the bad author, hereinafter called the perp. We deal with ‘mens rea’ (a
Latin phrase meaning “guilty mind") here, a strong intention to commit a wrongful act and even if the perp claims he or she didn’t intend to write so much the doctrine of transferred malice should be applied. Just in case.
A simply
cease-and-desist letter is useless here as we don’t deal with a tort anymore.
It is a crime. A hideous crime against humanity and literature. First the perp should be
stopped at all cost and isolated from the tools of his trade (also known as
stationery or a computer with a text editor). Then he or she should be
interrogated by professionals (CIA and Dick Cheney come to mind instantly) to
find out whether there are more copies of his or her book hidden there
somewhere. All copies will be confiscated and a hefty fine imposed (the CIA
guys are expensive but effective so definitely worth their money). Then the perp should be sent to a rehabilitation camp
where primo: he or she will be doing something useful for the society like
repairing cars, growing garden cress, milking cows, weeding, crocheting or
darning socks; secundo: they will be reading the pearls or literature daily so
they can see the errors of their ways, repent and convert; tertio: at the
moment of their release they will have to sign a desideratum in which they will
denounce their crimes and promise not to write anything for five years at least.
Finally a restitution bit, my favourite so far: apart from the fine, for every word written in their
bad novel they will have to buy a nutritional meal for one homeless pet, a cat or a dog. There are definitely too many homeless pets and too many bad authors
– let’s combine two wrongs and make it one big right for a change!
Now the
final question: how will you know whether a book is good or bad? I mean it is
easy with already published works but what about those which haven’t been
finished yet? Before the publication every writer will have to submit one
chapter of his or her work (or at least 5,000 words if there are no chapters) to a
panel of Highly Accomplished Reviewers and their Sadistic Henchmen (H.A.R.S.H)
, consisting of literary critics, reviewers, book bloggers and police
enforcers. These will produce a paid review at the cost of the prospective
author. If more than half of them give a negative opinion about the submitted
text, the author will be ordered to stop writing immediately, find another job
and buy every panel member a bottle of alcohol of their choice for causing them
a substantial psychical discomfort with such a bad text. If any author fails to do
so he or she will be sent the ugliest, the fattest, the most foul-mouthed and
unpleasant policemen and/or soldiers around to enforce the law - take them straight to the rehabilitation camp. No SEAL, no fun
for the wicked.
Finally
those authors who dare plagiarize the work of the others will have additionally their thumb and index finger of the writing hand and one of their ear cut off. The fingers – so they steal no
more. I am not sure about the reason behind the ear but if I think long
and hard about it I am pretty sure I will come up with something logical. Anyway I
do feel the hand itself won’t suffice.
Authors who behave badly while dealing with constructive criticism of their readers will be forced to answer fan mail of other, more successful/better-behaved authors for at least one year. Let's hope they will learn how to be kind even through their gritted teeth.
Authors who behave badly while dealing with constructive criticism of their readers will be forced to answer fan mail of other, more successful/better-behaved authors for at least one year. Let's hope they will learn how to be kind even through their gritted teeth.
Enough talking - organize ourselves and act now!



No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for stopping by - I always appreciate if you share your thoughts!
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.