It’s funny, but the most difficult thing about reviewing any Tokyopop OEL manga is that you have to be ready for the creator to e-mail you within 12 hours of the review going online. Well the creator… or their fans. It’s easy enough when it comes to North American creators working outside of “global manga”; if you write something they just bitch about you on a friends-locked Live Journal post, or send an e-mail cursing your name to a couple of their buddies. This has not been my experience with Tokyopop’s “not-Japanese-manga-creators”. The absolute worst example of this happened to my buddy Scott Robins, who was screamed at by (frankly) rabid Peach Fuzz fans for daring to suggest some of the imagery and language used in the book wasn’t 100% appropriate for their target audience of “very young”. It’s not like Scott doesn’t determine such things professionally, every day, at Scholastic Books. To her credit though, Peach Fuzz creator Lindsay Cibos did step in and calm them down after a little while…
What’s he talking about? Well, probably something like what Johanna Draper Carlson had to deal with recently. It all started when she reviewed Tokyopop’s Mail Order Ninja and found it wanting, before finding the following in her comments section:
I mean no disrespect by this, but you seem to have an inability to recognize the inertia of character arcs. I see it in this review and I have seen it in several past reviews. This seems to be most common when you review the opening chapters of a series. You’ll often criticize the characters as being unlikable or unredeemable and then write off the whole title… Sometimes it seems like if any creator front-loads a book with questionable protagonists, you are going to dislike it because the characters don’t immediately measure up to your criteria for enjoyment. You’ll make some strange assumptions and then write it off.
Like I said earlier, you seem to have an inability to recognize the inertia of character arcs.
I just want you to recognize this pattern and learn to better predict these things. Stop making assumptions about a series or a book based on your limited exposure to the first chapter. Start looking for patterns of potential catharsis instead of assuming incompetence on the part of the creators.
You are under no obligations to do so, but I do think it would make your reviews more constructive and helpful to your faithful readers – readers like me.
Johanna responded to this, and moved from specific rebuttal to more general point:
I don’t think this is my problem, but the publisher’s.
If this had been a more typically sized Tokyopop book, then I’m sure that Timmy would have learned his lesson in the second half, and I suspect that that’s what happens in book two. Let’s leave aside the six-month gap between the story setup and its conclusion, in that case, as well as the other problems I had with the book. if I’m still not excited to read the next volume, then I say that’s the fault of the creators who haven’t created that anticipation in me. The decision to break the story where it did and package it this way was damaging to its presentation. I can’t evaluate a book based on what might happen next month or in the future; if I did, I’d rightly be criticized for trying to write the book myself.
The reader has every right to judge whatever they were sold. The story doesn’t end at the conclusion of book one, but the reader needs to achieve some satisfaction with what they’ve read. If they didn’t like it, or they didn’t like it enough, then the publisher (or supporter) can’t assume that they’ll come back to see the eventual redemption. After all, it’s not cheap to keep following a $3 superhero comic or a $6 or $10 manga series. Publishers and creators cannot and should not take their audience for granted. There’s too much else out there that the reader might like better. You’ve got to make EACH chunk satisfying in a world of so much competition.
Meanwhile, Joshua Elder, writer of Mail Order Ninja, posted in response to the original review over at The Engine, and his initial point is interesting when following Johanna’s comment above about the publisher’s responsibility:
I just got totally p0wned by Johanna Draper Carlson. Now I’ll concede that the book feels incomplete — it was originally designed to the first half of a 180 page book until TPop decided to split it in half and go with the 80-90 page format instead.
But the jokes were obvious and not very clever?! This book has cleverness coming out the wazoo and the yin-yang!
But of course I could be wrong.
Later he adds “I just want to say for the record that I’m upset about the review, but I’m not slitting my wrists or anything about it. I honestly want to know what everyone thinks — both pro and con — and why. Opening myself up to criticism, especially from critics like Johanna whom I respect, (even if I don’t agree with absolutely everything she says) is the only way I’ll ever improve,” and both he and Johanna have said that no-one bears any illwill for the strange reaction to the initial review. Nonetheless, it all kind of proves Chris Butcher’s point, don’t you think?
November 13th, 2006 at 10:25 am
“I mean no disrespect by this, but you seem to have an inability to recognize the inertia of character arcs.”
If there’s inertia, how can it arc?
November 13th, 2006 at 11:23 am
Graeme- Nah, the thing with Josh Elder doesn’t necessarily prove my point. However, this totally does, and is pretty great:
http://lilrivkah.livejournal.com/189845.html?style=mine
Actually, I just checked and she made it a protected entry, but yeah. It was pretty amusing to wake up to.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:29 am
Thankfully, the majority of TokyoPop OEL hasn’t been very interesting to begin with.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:23 pm
The reasons I got so hot and bothered about Johanna’s review are a) This is my first book and everything that happens with it is the MOST IMPORTANT THING EVER, b) I respect Johanna’s critical acumen and therefore a negative review from her did shake me up a little and c) This is quite literally the first bad review I’ve gotten.
Seriously, everyone else has really, really enjoyed the book. Time-Out Chicago, Chris Sims and the 500 or so Barnes & Noble customers that I’ve handsold the book to over the past few months have given it nothing but rave reviews.
And I think this was a case of Johanna just not “getting it” per se. And I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is. If you’re a reviewer and you want a copy of books 1 and 2, e-mail at elder1938-at-ureach.com and I’ll send them to you (so long as supplies last). I believe in the book and I’ll put it out there. Not everyone is going to like it, I know that. But so far - 1 bad raview out of 500 — I think the odds are pretty good that you’ll dig it.
If not, tell me why and hopefully I can improve. I look at myself in the mirror every day — I know how imperfect I am.
November 13th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
#1: (puts on science geek hat) Actually, inertia is a property of an object in motion as well as one standing still- it’s a property of all matter. If an object is in motion, its inertia will keep it in motion until something acts on it. If it’s still, its inertia will keep it still. (takes off science geek hat, leaving normal geek hat)
So the term’s used properly.
November 13th, 2006 at 2:06 pm
It seems to me that many of TokyoPop’s creators are young and not yet well-schooled in the proper behavior in regards to not responding to reviewers about their reviews about their work. It’s gauche, even when fancy-pants writers like Salman Rushdie do it. It’s difficult at first, but it’s worth it to learn to restrain yourself because, more often than not, it’s the artist replying to the reviewer who is going to look like an ass, not the reviewer.
I do respond to reviews in SLG’s blog, but I try to address more general topics when I do so–like privileging artists over writers or assumptions about how much Disney controls the content of our licensed comics (which is nearly not at all).
November 13th, 2006 at 2:20 pm
Guilty as charged, Ms. Guzman. I’m greener than the Incredible Hulk, and it no doubt shows. But I’ve been very careful not to disparage Johanna or even rebut her review aside from saying that I’m proud of “Mail Order Ninja” and lots of other folks like it too.
She has a big soapbox, and (if I may very badly mix a couple metaphors) she really took me to the woodshed with it. I just wanted other folks to know that were other opinions out there.
And I want to get all the opinions I can. I read reviews of my own work so that I can be a better writer (and, okay, for the occassional ego-stroke). But mostly I want to see what people are reacting to. What I’m doing right, AND what I’m doing wrong.
“Mail Order Ninja” has plenty of flaws. And there are things about it that will just put some folks off. I’m cool with that. I can improve the former and the latter is simply a fact of life.
But I (obviously) believe in the book, and that’s why I’m willing to — at my own expense — put it into the hands of any reviewer who wants to read it. I think the odds are that he or she will like it, and I’ll end up recouping my investment many times over.
And don’t worry — I promise not to harass anyone via e-mail or castigate them on message boards if they don’t like the book. I’m honestly very happy with the book and if other folks like it, that’s just gravy.
November 13th, 2006 at 3:29 pm
Joshua, Just want to remind you that a review is one individual’s experience of reading a book. A million people can read and love your book, but that doesn’t invalidate Johanna’s experience. It just makes her view a minority opinion. If Johanna saw the punch lines coming from a mile away, you can’t say she didn’t. Just because most of your readers were suprised by your jokes, doesn’t mean that at least one person, if not a few, saw through the jokes instantly. You can disagree with Johanna’s assestment of your work, but you can’t argue that her review was wrong or misguided. Her review is what it is, a record of her personal reaction.
November 13th, 2006 at 4:01 pm
No argument here. Like I’ve said many times over, I can’t argue with an opinion. Nor do I intend to. I certainly was hoping that Johanna would like the book — which is why I sent her a copy in the first place. I’m disappointed that she didn’t (though I’m still hoping to win her over with book two), but it’s not the end of the world.
My only concern is that she’s a big presence online and her reviews really do count for something. But she’s not the only opinion out there and I want folks to know that plenty of people have read “Mail Order Ninja” and enjoyed it thoroughly and that, therefore, they may as well.
I’m not saying that she’s objectively wrong or that “Mail Order Ninja” is the greatest thing since sliced bread. All I am saying is that I think the book is really fun and lots of other folks agree with me.
I’m a critic too (soon to be writing for the Chicago Sun-Times) and I understand that there are some things I love that other people despise and vice versa. Certain matters of taste are completely subjective, and I’d be a fool to argue otherwise.
November 13th, 2006 at 10:27 pm
Joshua Elder wrote:
“My only concern is that she’s a big presence online and her reviews really do count for something. …”
“I’m not saying that she’s objectively wrong or that “Mail Order Ninja” is the greatest thing since sliced bread. All I am saying is that I think the book is really fun and lots of other folks agree with me.”
You point out Johanna’s a well-respected online comics critic. You’ve said you respect her opinion. Nevertheless, you seem to be mounting a campaign to offset what she’s said. And your biggest mistake is that it’s a public campaign.
If a negative review is going to have such a pronounced impact on you, you ought not seek out any reviews of your work.
November 14th, 2006 at 12:23 am
Don wrote:
“If a negative review is going to have such a pronounced impact on you, you ought not seek out any reviews of your work.”
This is something that a lot of creators have warned me about. I guess I should have heeded those warnings.
November 14th, 2006 at 8:11 am
Joshua:
Let your work speak for you. Consider the amount of time you’ve spent trying to needlessly rebut Johanna’s review (and address the online ripples related to your initial response). Your time is better spent elsewhere, like on your storytelling. That’s not a shot at Johanna (a long-time friend of mine), or your work. It’s a simple assessment of how to most effectively handle the situation and your resources. And listen to MacPherson, he’s about as savvy as Carlson.
November 14th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
Let it be said that I’m in complete agreement with what everyone here has said regarding my rather foolish attempt to address Johanna’s review.
I was certainly not attempting to offend her or even rebut her per se — only call attention to the many other positive reviews MON has gotten. Damage control, if you will. And, naturally, I only exacerbated the problem.
The lesson that I’ve learned — and that many of you have been earnestly trying to impart — is that the book no longer belongs to me. Once it leaves my head it belongs equally to all potential readers, of which I am only one among 6 billion or so. I can’t engage or control it any longer — nor do I honestly want to.
Therefore I’m going to take what remains of my dignity and exit the Internet stage right. From this point forward my only interaction with reviews and reviewers will be of the “Glad you liked it!” or “Hope you like the next one!” variety.
And my offer still stands — any reviewer who wants a copy of MON has but to ask and it shall be given.
Cheers.
November 14th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
Oh dear. I hope reviewers won’t start steering clear of big-eyed American comics.
I wonder if this is happening because OEL creators are generally new to the world of comicking and criticsm. I mean, book authors have to get smacked about by editors over and over before they get published. Maybe this generation is just not hardened enough to take it yet. Sadly, in the age of the Internet, anything you say will be archived and can be read and used against you later, so I wonder how many creators are going to feel embarassed in the next twenty years. (Heck, I’m embarassed by message board posts I made last year!) Best battle plan: Do like the other, more experienced comic creators and keep your fuming to yourself and in your close circle of friends. And above all, roll with the punches!
November 16th, 2006 at 6:33 pm
Wow, I see a perfect example of at least one reviewer seeking out a creators blog in order to, I don’t know, get a response? So bascially, even in her locking it up, as was suggested by some of her peers, Rivkah is damned, no matter what she does?
I’m not her buddy, just noticing a trend in comments whent his subject is brought up here and there and everywhere.
-Tina