Sigh! Just discovered a horrible review on Faigon's Mate. More people liked it than not so I guess I shouldn't feel bad. Such blatant criticism leads me to believe the reader didn't realize why the series was written in the less than polished style it is presented.
The Farseek Series was my first attempt to write from alternating viewpoints in first person. It was deliberately written as an ordinary soldier or refugee without polished literary skills might write it in their personal journals about what happened to them.
The events in the stories, with the exception of Faigon's Mate, are about soldiers and rescues of Dreadnaught One. Some of the individual stories overlapped because they were told by different characters experiencing the same events. That's why it seemed like the same story retold, when it was actually a different experience of the same event.
Do I think that explanation is going to make people who have panned my story to like it better? Probably not. I just wanted to put it out there so they might get a different perspective. I've been writing and publishing long enough to know that some people really like my stories while others seem to take perverse pleasure in telling the world via reviews on Amazon they suck.
It makes me wonder. Was it really that badly written or just not the story the reviewer wanted it to be?
My next undertaking will be to remaster and re-edit the series into a box set for release in late fall.
No comments:
Post a Comment