Amazon Reviews (About Last Night)

I've often thought of the post-war generation as the luckiest in history.  The Baby-Boomers - in the UK, at least - had so much: universal healthcare, free education, welfare, jobs and houses ...

The present generation appears to have even more.  But I think they have less.  True, they have access to the most remarkable invention of all time, the internet.  Practically all the knowledge in the world is available to them in an instant.  We can talk, face-to-face, with almost anyone, wherever they are, in real time.  Music, books and films can be downloaded, often for free.

No one has ever enjoyed privileges like those before.  And I suspect that they will not last.  The infrastructure required to maintain a healthy internet is mind-boggling.  Besides which, the internet may effectively eat itself.  The way things are going ...

Let me illustrate.  Yesterday, a really rather lovely review of my book, The King Arthur Conspiracy, was posted on the new Review blog.  The reviewer knew nothing about the book when it first arrived, and I had never met, heard of or communicated with the reviewer before she received it.  For the record, she is an avid and active reviewer of books, for the Historical Novel Society and others.

She very kindly posted her review on the Goodreads website, entirely on her own initiative, and then posted it also on Amazon.com.

And then something odd happened.  Her review on Amazon was instantly "disliked".

Now, I'm no expert on Amazon.  So when I heard through Facebook that her review was attracting numerous dislikes, all very suddenly, I couldn't pretend to have any idea what was going on.  All I  do know is that she became very hurt and upset by the reaction, which seemed to have little or nothing to do with the review itself.

Within a very short while, Amazon had deleted the entire review.

Previously, The King Arthur Conspiracy had attracted four 5-Star reviews over a fair period of time, all extremely enthusiastic and complimentary.  Then, a while back, somebody took the trouble to post a 1-Star review, pronouncing the book "pure junk".  His reasons for doing so were a bit bizarre (he criticised my use of place-names, which he pointed out were not recorded until several hundred years after Arthur lived - but then, Gaelic culture was entirely oral, and no one felt the need for maps, and to pretend that place-names were spontaneously invented just before the maps were drawn is silly, to say the least).  Otherwise, his review was a mere bile-spewing exercise.  But hey, what can you do?

I didn't respond.  What would be the point?  Just as you can't really answer back when a professional reviewer slates you, so you can't do much when an amateur tears into your work.  Best to stay out of it.

However, it is a problem - because anyone who visits the Amazon.com page for The King Arthur Conspiracy sees, first amongst the customer reviews, a rather savage - if barely reasonable or logical - assault, instead of the preceeding 5-Star reviews, which were uniformly glowing.  In that regard, another pleasant 5-Star review was a bit of a boon, because that would then take precedence.  The crude rubbishing would fall back into second place.

So having that 5-Star review attacked and then removed is disappointing.  It means, of course, that the nasty - and entirely less-than-typical - review returns to the top of the pile.

I'm really not sure what happened.  There are two ways of looking at it:

1) the reviewer has her detractors, who keep an eye out for her reviews (of which there are plenty) with the intention solely of "disliking" them

2) the book has its detractors, who keep an eye out for positive reviews, which they then seek to spoil and, if possible, force Amazon to take them down as quickly as possible

I can't think of any other options.

Whichever it was - concerted intolerance towards the reviewer or the book - we're looking at something unpleasant, ignoble ... and sadly all too common in the internet age.

There are "reasons" why option (2) might be the right one.  Arthur arouses strong emotions, especially among those who have - shall we say - imperialistic notions, and want Arthur to be the familiar knight-in-shining-armour of the medieval fantasies.  Such people are hugely intolerant of any research into the historical Arthur.  In much the same camp, broadly speaking, are those of a hard line religious persuasion, who would no doubt seek to harm the book and its reputation because of its revelations about the early Church.

On the other hand, if option (1) is correct - the frenzied attack on the review was motivated more by animosity towards the reviewer - then I'm slightly more perplexed.  Why do that?  As far as I have been able to determine, the reviewer is a hard-working, conscientious person with a genuine love of books and a commendable desire to promote authors if and when she feels that their work is worthy of recommendation.  And she recommended The King Arthur Conspiracy very highly.

It's all rather puzzling.  Whatever the cause or motivation, an independent review of my book on the historical Arthur immediately became the target of a concerted attack for reason or reasons unknown and by persons who were too cowardly to show their faces.

Overall, Amazon's policy of inviting and encouraging customers to leave reviews of their products has always struck me as a good thing.  It's very democratic, and intended - no doubt - to be helpful to all parties.  But human nature is what it is, and the system has repeatedly come in for abuse.

Some writers have got all their friends and family to flood their pages with excellent reviews.  Some authors have set out to sabotage rivals by posting anonymous scathing reviews.

Now, either individual reviewers are being targeted (why?) or individual books are being targeted because a group of people don't want others to read them and so they will take steps to ensure that only the most vicious (if wholly useless) reviews remain immediately visible.  Either way, we're dealing with some extremely sad and twisted people here - people who will undermine the unpaid work of a dedicated reviewer or strive to harm book sales for their own ideological reasons.

I would ask everybody to be aware of this.  For the sake of free speech - which I believe is a given - I do not seek to have negative reviews deleted, nor do I respond to such reviews.  Assuming that the review in question represented a genuine response to my work (and not, say, a kneejerk backlash based on ignorance or prejudice), then it has every right to remain there.  The balance remains with the positive, 5-Star reviews.

But it would appear that there are people - acting in concert, it would seem - who don't believe in free speech at all.  Whether it's the work of the reviewer which they seek to spoil or the work of the author which they disapprove of, the outcome is the same.  A good review is attacked and then removed.  The reviewer suffers (she was very upset), as does the author, whose sales are inevitably affected.

If the type of internet troll or bully who indulges in this sort of behaviour had any form of moral courage and integrity, they would either ignore reviews they disagree with or give reasoned and rational grounds for attacking them.  Entering into any sort of debate, though, is anathema to such people.  In fact, free and open debate is the opposite of what they want.

They want to shut down free speech and bury historical research.  They want to prevent hard working writers and reviewers from having their say, simply because they have developed a grudge.

You are not allowed to write about the historical Arthur or the early Church in Britain, unless you do so in the terms approved of by these invisible trolls.

In other words, you are not allowed to write about history.  Or religion.  Because they will swiftly move to have you censored.  And anyone who reads and admires what you have written will be victimised.

It would seem that we don't burn books on bonfires anymore.  We just rubbish them on Amazon.  And so the internet proves to be every bit as bigoted and fanatical as the Inquisition.

In years to come, people will gather in caves and tell stories of their predecessors - gigantic people, who ate whatever they wanted whenever they wanted (food was "fast"), who made heat and light happen just like that, and who had all the knowledge in the world at their fingertips. 

But they destroyed it all through petty bickering, jealousy, selfishness, and a weird fascination for the pointless and inane. 

And because some of them could not tolerate free speech and the results of painstaking research.

New Review Blog Launched TODAY

The ecology of publishing is changing.

In the Industrial Age, books were printed and bound in quantitites.  They were then transported, stored, distributed and stacked.  It was an expensive and fairly complex process, but essentially the same as any sort of manufacturing industry.

That still goes on, of course.  But new technology has allowed alternative publishing models to thrive.  Now, a writer can register online with a print-on-demand company.  He or she can then create two files (one for the inside of the book, one for the outside) and send them to the printers.  A bar code or "ISBN" on the book means that all the relevant details can then be displayed by online booksellers, such as the mighty Amazon.  When the book is ordered, the message goes out to the printers, and a copy is printed, bound, packaged and sent out.  Overheads ... practically nil.

And then there are ebooks.  Once a book has been written, edited, formatted and converted into the right kind of file, the sky is the limit here.  Any number of ebooks can be sold and instantly despatched to ebook readers at no real cost.  There aren't any production overheads: as long as the consumer has a Kindle, a tablet, a computer, an ebook reader, then the book can be "produced" for free.  Which means that most of the profits go straight to the author.

What this means is that a whole new publishing industry has developed.  Gone are the old, painful processes of acquiring agents, approaching publishers, piles of rejection letters, long waits and tiny royalties.  Publishing can now be almost instantaneous.  Everything is in the hands of the writer now.

But what about the reader?  Well, there's suddenly a lot more choice out there.  And most books published by the new methods are considerably cheaper to buy than those which have gone through the traditional process.  A newly published ebook, or nicely-produced print-on-demand copy, can be purchased for - what? - about $3 maybe.

When there's an explosion of new product, readily accessible at relatively low cost, a new form of marketing has to emerge.  The old system relied on the marketing contacts, resources and budgets of the publishing houses.  The new system relies on networking, social media and recommendations.

Reviewing books is effectively the new trend.  It's about the only way that a reader and prospective purchaser can decide whether or not they want to try out a new book.  And this year, reviewing is taking off in a BIG way.  I've just received a new hardback novel to review for one of my favourite historical websites (those lovely Historical Honeys), and will soon be getting a couple more to review from the fascinating Moon Books stable. 

Authors are going to be spending a lot more of their time reviewing other authors' books, because we can no longer rely on the traditional marketing methods.  Now, we do it ourselves.

So ... it gives me great pleasure to announce the launch of a new blog dedicated to reviews of new books, along with author interviews, competitions and prize giveaways.  This REVIEW blog grew out of a very active and exciting Facebook group, and such has been the interest in the new REVIEW group blog that the official launch party has been extended from a week to a fortnight!

Please pop over and have a look.  My day is Day 6 - Thursday - and I'll be giving away a free signed copy of Who Killed William Shakespeare? to go with my own blogpost about historical fact and fiction.

This is how we do things nowadays.  The old media are lumbering along.  New media is where publishing is really happening.

http://thereviewgroup.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/welcome-to-review-group-blog.html

Sneak Preview

Just follow the link:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Who-Killed-William-Shakespeare-Murderer/dp/0752487256/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1362152042&sr=1-2

Hello

Apologies, one and all, for having neglected the blog for a few weeks.  The reason being that I've been tied up with revisions on my Shakespeare manuscript, working towards a deadline in early October.  The pressure's on because the book is already up on Amazon.co.uk (no cover image yet), which makes it all feel a bit real.

While Lindsey, my editor at The History Press, is going through the manuscript ahead of my final revisions, I've been dipping my toes in what is unfamiliar territory - the acquisition of images, or rather the licences permitting me to reproduce those images inside the Shakespeare book.

Didn't have to worry about that sort of thing too much with the Arthur book; expecting to publish The King Arthur Conspiracy myself, I avoided any images in the book which weren't essentially of my own making.  Besides which, images of the historical Arthur and his world aren't all that easy to come by: I could have included photos of various hills, and the odd crumbling hill-fort, but that's about it.

Who Killed William Shakespeare, on the other hand, will have a fair number of images in it.  Many of them portraits of one kind or another.  And, hopefully, a death mask.  And a skull.

These images - portraits, death mask, skull - all have features in common.  Some of those features merely identify them as representing the same individual (William Shakespeare).  Most give clues as to how he died.

So, as you can imagine, they're fairly important.

Anyway, that's why I've been away, as it were.  Finishing the manuscript and starting the painstaking process of accessing and studying images and (hopefully) acquiring the rights to reproduce them in the forthcoming book.

The King Arthur Conspiracy, meanwhile, has been doing its thing.  That is, it's been dividing people.  Those whose thinking is essentially dualistic have been trying to undermine it.  Those whose thinking is more Hermetic have expressed admiration.  No great surprises there, then.  Indeed, that's why I included a quotation from Andre Gide early in the book:

"Alas! there exists an order of minds so sceptical that they deny the possibility of any fact as soon as it diverges from the commonplace.  It is not for them that I write."

I anticipate a similar reaction when the Shakespeare book comes out (next August, according to Amazon).  The dualistic tendency has held sway for an awfully long time, now.  But in history, as in politics, it has become reductive and obstructive.  It argues fiercely against any new fact.  Under cover of a supposed logical rationalism, it advances an agenda which is remarkably political and extremely backward-looking.  It's the reason why we, as a species, are in so much trouble these days.

But then, "It is not for them that I write."

Back soon, I promise!

High Five

Well, an interesting 24 hours or so.  A lovely interview about The King Arthur Conspiracy with Sean Moncrieff on Newstalk, Ireland's independent talk radio station.

And then, History Today magazine sent through the proofs for an article they'll be publishing in next month's edition.  It's entitled "Arthur and the Church", and with the fantastic illustrations the whole thing runs to seven pages.  New territory for me, and all very exciting.

First, though, I came across my first Amazon review for the Arthur book.  John, who wrote it, is an American author and post-graduate researcher.  He put out a shout a few months ago for somebody to mentor him through a university paper on the subject of Arthur and Sustainability.

I was intrigued straightaway.  But I also knew that the other Arthur enthusiasts on the site would simply see his request as an excuse for some nitpicking and squabbling.  That's why the "experts" haven't found Arthur - they're too busy arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

I saw John's request as a fascinating opportunity, a chance to explore what the history and legends of Arthur might have to tell us about sustainability, which is surely the biggest issue of our age.  John and I communicated by email, and after a while I suggested he have a look at the manuscript of my Arthur book (then with the publishers) so that he knew where I was coming from.

John, I have to say, is a great reader.  He read the Arthur manuscript twice, to my knowledge, and had many kind, encouraging and thoughtful observations to make about it.

So, he had a bit of a headstart.  And his 5-Star review on Amazon is a lovely tribute.  I'll share it with you here:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/0752476858/ref=dp_db_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Hope to post a link to the History Today article when it makes it onto the 'net.  Till then, best wishes to all!!

To Kindle Interest

It's out!  On Kindle, that is.

The real books will be on their way soon.  But for those who Kindle, or those who just fancy a taster, Amazon is the place:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-King-Arthur-Conspiracy-Scottish/dp/0752476858/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1340102692&sr=1-2

I'll also provide updates on the publicity as it happens.  A couple of magazine articles are pending, including a big piece in History Today (August edition).  We'll keep you posted.

But that's enough about The King Arthur Conspiracy.  I'd also like to draw your attention to another new book.  Not one that I've been involved with in any way.  It's the first of a trilogy.

The Chronicles of Iona: Exile by Paula de Fougerolles is a novel about "the two men who laid the foundations of the Scottish nation" - Aedan mac Gabrain, King of the Scots, and St Columba.  The author describes them as "a real-life sixth-century Merlin and King Arthur".

The similarities between St Columba and the literary invention that is Merlin had occured to me whilst I was researching and writing my history of Arthur.  Aedan mac Gabrain was Arthur's father (the first man on record to be known as Arthur, that is).  The original Merlin (a name of later date) was fairly close in age to the historical Arthur.  He also did not look much like the Merlin we have come to know and love.

Arguably, St Columba did look a bit more like the traditional Merlin.  Hair cut in the Druidic tonsure (shaved at the front, long at the back), with a blackthorn staff and stained eyelids, Columba might have passed for a Merlin figure.

But the "real" Merlin was an enemy of Columba.  I've even wondered whether their antipathy had anything to do with Geoffrey of Monmouth's invention, in the twelfth century, of the name Merlin.

You see, Columba's adoptive name meant "Dove".  And the hunting bird known as the merlin is scientifically known as Falco columbarius.  Merlin, you could say, was the raptor who hunted the Dove.

Anyway, that's all by the bye.  Please feel free to check out The King Arthur Conspiracy on Amazon.  And then, when you've done that, and ordered copies for everyone you know, check out this page:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Chronicles-Iona-Paula-Fougerolles/dp/0615602541/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1340103057&sr=1-1

The Chronicles of Iona - potentially, a companion-piece to The King Arthur Conspiracy: How a Scottish Prince Became a Mythical Hero.

Here You Go

This might seem a bit premature - but then, there might be some out there who want to book early to avoid disappointment.

The book isn't due out until next summer, but Amazon are ready to take advance orders:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/King-Arthur-Conspiracy-Scottish-Mythical/dp/0752476858/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1321999216&sr=1-2

An excellent stocking-filler ... for Christmas next year!!